UC-NRLF 


SB    SDD    5fi7 


v>    Q>  F 


JMAZAR6TH 


1 

i 

i 
8 

i 
8 


* 


IBalbone  fE8L  ©raham 


sw. 


//ore  acquired Price,  $... 

PLEASE  READ.  REMEMBER   AND   RETURN. 


1 

i 

1 
1 

1 


GIFT  OF 


M.  W»**-r>cJuxM 


BY  REV.  JOHN  A.  BROADUS,  D.D.,  LLD. 


ON  THE  PREPARATION  AND  DELIVERY 
OF  SERMONS.  16th  Edition.  Crown 
8vo,  cloth,        $1.75 

LECTURES       ON       THE       HISTORY      OF 

PREACHING.      i2mo,  cloth 1.50 

SERMONS   AND    ADDRESSES,   with   Por- ' 

trait  of  the  author.     Crown  8vo,  cloth,     .    1.50 

COMMENTARY    ON     MATTHEW.     Crown 

8vo,  cloth,        . 2.25 

**#  Any  of  the  above  sent  by  mail,  post-paid,  to  atiy 
part  of  the  United  States  or  Canada,  on  receipt  of  price, 

A.    C.    ARMSTRONG    &    SON, 

New  York. 


JESUS   OF    NAZARETH 


I.    HIS  PERSONAL   CHARACTER. 
II.    HIS    ETHICAL   TEACHINGS. 
III.    HIS   SUPERNATURAL   WORKS. 


THREE    LECTURES    BEFORE    THE    Y.   M.    C.   A.    OF 
JOHNS  HOPKINS   UNIVERSITY,    IN* 
LEVERING  HALL. 


JOHN  A.  BROADUS,  D.D.,  LL.D., 
President  of  the  Southern  Baptist   Theological  Seminary,   i^ 


Tfl/RD  EDITI'W; 


NEW  YORK: 

A.   C.   ARMSTRONG    k    SON; 

714    Broadway, 

1S90. 


2  V  .  ^ 


Copyright,  1890, 
By  JOHN  A.   BROADUS. 


T\ 


PREFACE. 


These  lectures  were  delivered  in  March,  1890, 
at  the  instance  of  Eugene  Levering,  Esq.,  of  Balti- 
more, in  the  Hall  which  he  has  recently  erected  and 
given  to  the  Johns  Hopkins  University,  for  the  use 
of  the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association  of  that 
institution ;  and  the  President  of  the  Y.  M.  C.  A. 
specially  requested  their  publication.  They  were 
not  designed  as  class-room  lectures,  since  many  not 
connected  with  the  University  were  invited  to 
attend. 

The  subject  treated  seems  to  possess  an  ever- 
deepening  interest  at  the  present  time.  The  per- 
sonal character  of  Jesus  is  now  widely  perceived  to 
be  an  important  guarantee  of  his  teachings  and 
works.  This  character  is  presented  by  the  first 
lecture  in  a  way  that  to  some  may  appear  lacking 

in  devout  warmth  j  but  the  object  was  to  gain  the 
3 


371496 


4  Frefdec. 

concurrence  ot  every  person  who  will  calmly  survey 
the  historical  facts,  and  thus  to  lay  a  foundation  for 
what  woidd  follow.  It  is  hoped  that  the  second  lect- 
ure will  tend  to  rectify  certain  erroneous  but  quite 
prevalent  /iews  of  the  Saviour's  teaching  ;  and  that 
the  third  lecture  may  be  found  to  have  some  argu- 
mentative force  in.  regard  to  his  mission  and  claims. 
The  little  volume  is  the  fruit  of  life-time  studies, 
and  has  been  prepared  with  the  author's  best  exer- 
tions, and  a  great  desire  to  promote  "the  knowledge 
of  Jesus,  the  most  excellent  of  the  sciences." 

J.  A.  B. 

Louisville,  Ky., 
May,  1890. 


CONTENTS. 


LECTUKE  I. 

The  Personal  Character  of  Jesus.     .     .     .     .     .       9 

LECTUKE  II. 

The  Ethical  Teachings  of  Jesus 39 

LECTUKE   III. 

The  Supernatural  Works  of  Jesus 71 


I. 

ffjjt  personal  Cjrcrarhr  of  fesus. 


THE  PERSONAL  CHARACTER  OF  JESUS. 


Bh 


T7T  WHATEVER  else  many  of  us  believe  as  to 
*  *  Jesus  the  Saviour,  all  men  believe  in  his 
thorough  humanity?)  The  orthodox  world  has  often 
failed  to  make  full  practical  recognition  of  his  hu- 
manity, through  an  exclusive  attention  to  other 
views  of  his  person  and  work  ;  and  the  modern  his- 
torical spirit  has  been  a  benefactor  to  orthodoxy  by 
bringing  out  his  human  character  and  life  as  a  vivid 
reality.  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  Founder  of  Chris- 
tianity, stands  before  us  to-day  as  one  of  the  defi- 
nite personages  of  human  history.  The  loading 
facts  of  his  career,  the  chief  peculiarities  of  his 
teaching,  the  distinctive  traits  of  his  character,  are 
now  really  beyond  dispute.  And  the  excellence  of 
his  character,  its  high  and  peerless  excellence,  is 
now  recognized  not  only  by  Christians  of  every 
type  and  by  many  Jews^  but  by  persons  holding 
almost  every  form  of  unbelief.  Time  was,  even  in 
the  modern  centuries,  when  some  men  of  talents 
and  culture  reviled  him  as  an  impostor  or  a  fanatic,' 
as  did  some  of  the  blinded  Jews  who  were  his  con- 
temporaries. But  there  is  hardly  a  man  in  all 
the  world  who  would  speak  thus  to-day.  Even 
persons  who  allow  themselves  to  ridicule  the  Bible, 

9 


10  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

and  the  God  whom  it  describes,  are  unwilling  now  to 
speak  lightly  of  Jesus  $  and  if  in  some  rare  cases  a 
man  attempts  to  hint  possible  and  slight  defect,  he 
seems  to  do  so  with  reluctance,  and  turns  quickly 
away  to  join  the  chorus  of  eulogy.  Kobert  Brown- 
ing, in  a  letter  published  since  his  death,  cites  sev- 
eral utterances  of  men  of  genius  as  to  the  Christian 
faith,  and  among  them  one  from  Charles  Lamb. 
"In  a  gay  fancy  with  some  friends,  as  to  how  he 
and  they  would  feel  if  the  greatest  of  the  dead  were 
to  appear  suddenly  in  flesh  and  blood  once  more — 
on  the  final  suggestion,  c  And  if  Christ  entered  this 
room  ? '  he  changed  his  manner  at  once  and  stut- 
tered out,  as  his  manner  was  when  moved,  i  You 
see,  if  Shakespeare  entered  we  should  ajj^rise  5  if 
he  appeared,  we  must  kneel.'  w  Such  reverence  is 
not  a  mere  result  of  Christian  education,  of.  Chris- 
tian literature  and  art  and  usages  ;  it  will  be  felt  by 
any  person  of  susceptible  nature  who  will  thought- 
fully read  one  of  the  gospels  at  a  single  sitting,  and 
alone  with  his  beating  heart  and  his  God. 

Of  a  character  thus  unique,  unparalleled,  univer- 
sally reverenced,  how  can  we  attempt  a  portraiture  % 
The  effort  is  fore-doomed  to  failure.  It  must  be 
disappointing  to  taste  and  unsatisfying  to  devotion. 
No  painter  among  all  the  great  names  has  made  a 
picture  of  Jesus  which  a  loving  reader  of  the  gos- 
pels can  feel  to  be  adequate.  How  can  we  depict 
his  character  in  words  ?  But  if  one  undertakes  the 
task,  of  all  things  he  must  beware  of  high-wrought 
expressions.  The  most  inadequate  language  is  less 
unworthy  of  Jesus  than  inflated  language.  And  it 
may  contribute  towards  the  design  of  these  lectinv.-s 


His  Personal  Character,  11 

if  we  attempt,  in  sheer  simplicity,  to  bring  before 
our  minds  the  circumstances  of  his  sejf-manife sta- 
tion, and  the  more  easily  apprehended  traits  of  his 
character.  The  present  sketch  has  been  wrought 
out  from  the  gospels  themselves,  with  suggestions 
afterwards  welcomed  from  several  recent  writings. 
For  the  present  we  must  leave  almost  entirely  out 
of  view  the  Saviour's  beautiful  teachings  and  glori- 
ous works,  which  are  to  be  considered  on  other 
occasions.  t^- 

Notice  first  the  external  conditions  of  his  life.  We 
all  know  that  he  was  reared  in  a  small  and  obscure 
village,  whose  inhabitants  were  rude  and  violent, 
and  had  an  ill-name  among  their  neighbors.  Not 
once  nor  twice  only  have  the  world's  wisest  and 
greatest,  the  world's  teachers  and  rulers,  sprung  ^  \  As 
from  some  petty  village  or  country  neighborhood. 
We  know  that  Jesus  was  reared  in  poverty,  and 
was  himself  a  mechanic,  a  worker  in  wood.  Justin 
Martyr,  who  lived  a  hundred  years  later  in  the 
same  region,  states  the  tradition  that  he  made 
ploughs  and  ox-yokes.  It  ought  to  be  clearly 
brought  out  in  our  time  that  the  Founder  of  Chris- 
tianity spent  his  early  life  as  what  we  call  a  work-^ 
ing-man.  Yet  remember  that  from  boyhood  he 
went  at  least  once  a  year,  and  probably  oftener,  to 
the  great  city  of  Jerusalem,  making  the  journey 
amid  scenes  of  varied  natural  beauty  and  all  man- 
ner of  sacred  associations,  to  mingle  with  vast 
crowds  from  every  district  of  the  Holy  Land  and 
from  many  a  distant  country,  and  to  take  part  in 
impressive  religious  ceremonies,  to  join  in  chanting 
the    sweet    Psalms   of  David,  and   listen   long    to 


12  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

the  fervent  reading  of  ancient  record  and  high  pro- 
phetic instruction  and  exhortation.  It  is  difficult  to 
estimate  the  benefits  that  would  be  derived  by  a 
highly  impressible  youthful  nature  during  the  whole 
period  between  the  age  of  twelve  and  that  of  thirty, 
from  such  journeys  and  weeks  of  abiding  in  the 
Holy  City. 

During  his  public  ministry  he  had  no  home,  and 
spent  most  of  his  time  in  travelling,  on  foot,  busy 
with  public  and  private  teaching,  and  sustained  by 
the  hospitality  of  friends  and  sometimes  of  stran- 
gers, or  by  money  contributed  by  generous  women 
for  the  support  of  himself  and  his  followers.  Yet 
observe  that  he  did  not  do  this  as  meritorious 
asceticism,  but  simply  from  a  desire  to  spend  his 
whole  time  in  doing  good,  throughout  a  ministry 
which  he  foresaw  must  be  short.  Even  .among 
ourselves  there  are  men  so  devoted  to  science  or 
art,  to  authorship  or  teaching  or  religious  ministra- 
tions, that  they  often  share  the  feeling  of  the  great 
scientific  man  who  said,  u  I  haven't  time  to  make 
money."  This  early  life  was  very  different  from 
that  of  Sakhya  Muni,  the  Founder  of  Buddhism, 
who  is  represented  as  the  son  of  a  wealthy  king, 
dwelling  for  years  in  a  home  of  luxury,  and  leaving 
it  to  become  an  ascetic.  Jesus  showed  no  tinge  of 
asceticism.  John  the  forerunner  made  his  life  an 
object  lesson  to  a  luxurious  age,  as  Elijah  had  done 
long  before,  by  dwelling  for  years  among  the  wild 
hills,  with  the  garb  and  the  food  of  the  poorest. 
But  it  was  quite  otherwise  with  Jesus.  He  wore 
good  clothing,  for  we  read  of  a  tunic  woven  without 
seam,  which  at  that  day  must  have  been  a  costly 


His  Personal  Charactar.  13 

garment.  He  spent  days  at  a  wedding  feast, 
which  the  forerunner  would  probably  not  have  con- 
sented to  attend.  He  accepted  invitations  from 
the  rich,  and  conformed  to  social  usage  by  reclining 
on  a  couch  beside  the  table  in  the  luxurious 
Persian  fashion;  and,  as  he  himself  expressly 
mentions,  ate  and  drank  what  others  did,  though  it 
exposed  him  even  then  to  misconception  and  un- 
kind remark.  Jesus  touched  life  at  many  points, 
yet  it  was  mainly  and  essentially  the  life  of  the 
poor.  The  profound  literary  and  artistic  interest 
now  felt  in  the  life  of  the  poor,  as  dealing  with  what 
is  u  common  to  man,"  ought  to  awaken  sympathy 
with  the  Beginnings  of  Christianity. 

Quietly  pursuing  the  healthy  duties  of  an  humble  ^^ 
calling,  profoundly  pondering  from  boyhood  the 
prophetic  writings,  Jesus  patiently  waited  till  the  yf 
time  came  for  him  to  appear  and  act.  The  earliest 
period  at  which  a  man  was  then  supposed  to  be 
mature  enough  for  highly  responsible  functions  was 
something  like  the  age  of  thirty.  At  that  age  the 
Saviour  came  forth  without  delay,  and  after  a  min- 
istry of  not  more  than  three  or  four  years  he  left 
the  earth.  He  taught  and  died  a  young  man.  To 
all  the  other  great  achievements  of  young  men  must 
be  added  this  incomparable  fact,  that  a  young  man 
gave  us  Christianity. 

Consider  next  the  personal  religious  life  of  Jesus. 
It  is  remarkable  how  often  we  find  mention  of  his 
praying.  The  innocent  and  holy  One  gave  frequent  / 
recognition  of  dependence  on  God,  which  is  one  of 
the  chief  elements  of  religious  feeling  and  convic- 
tion.    If  any  human  being  was  ever  abb  to  .stand 


11  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

alone  in  the  universe,  without  leaning  on  God,  it 
might  have  been  true  of  him.  Not  the  guilty  alone, 
nor  the  perilously  weak,  have  occasion  to  lift  the 
heart  in  prayer.  Jesus  habitually  and  lovingly 
prayed.  Nor  did  he  merely  keep  up  the  habit  of 
stated  devotion,  but  he  made  special  prayer  upon 
various  recorded  occasions.  At  his  baptism  we  are 
told  that  he  was  praying,  and  also  on  the  Mount  of 
Transfiguration.  He  spent  a  night  in  prayer  when 
about  to  select  the  Twelve.  They  were  to  be  the 
companions  of  his  remaining  life,  and  the  responsi- 
ble messengers  of  his  teaching  after  that  life  should 
be  ended.  The  selection  was  therefore  immensely 
important,  and  he  made  it  after  protracted  and 
special  prayer.  When  the  fanatical  multitude  of 
five  thousand  vehemently  declared  that  they  would 
make  him  king  even  against  his  will,  and  all,his  pa- 
tient spiritual  instructions  seemed  to  have  gone  for 
nothing,  he  bade  them  depart  and  went  up  into  the 
mountain  to  pray.  Thrice  in  Gethsemane  he  with- 
drew to  agonize  in  prayer,  and  his  last  words  on 
the  cross  were  words  of  prayer.  Strange  that 
heedless,  bustling,  self-sufficient  humanity  does  not 
see  its  own  folly  when  contemplating  that  life  of 
prayer. 

Remarkable  familiarity  with  the  sacred  writings 
appears  already  in  the  glimpse  we  catch  of  Jesus 
at  the  age  of  twelve  years,  and  comes  out  in  his 
constant  use  of  Scripture  for  argument  and  instruc- 
tion throughout  his  ministry.  He  also  used  it  for 
his  personal  support  in  times  of  special  trial.  In 
the  strange  and  wonderful  scene  of  manifested  temp- 
tation, he  three  times  quotes  the  book  of  Deuteron- 


His  Personal  Character.  15 

omy  as  an  answer  to  the  tempter,  and  on  the  cross 
three  times  quotes  the  Psalms. 

Jesus  habitually  attended  upon  public  worship  in 
the  synagogues.  He  must  have  been  often  pained 
or  repelled  by  wrong .  explanations  of  the  sacred 
writings,  by  the  repetition  of  foolish  traditions,  by 
unwise  counsel  and  exhortation,  but  we  are  ex- 
pressly told  that  it  was  "his  custom "  to  go  into  the 
synagogue.  How  little  did  the  men  who  spoke 
imagine  the  thoughts  revolving  in  the  mind  of  a 
quiet  youth  in  the  assembly ;  even  as  we  now  little 
know  the  slowly-developing  wisdom,  the  latent  po- 
tencies of  some  student  to  whom  we  lecture,  some 
child  to  whom  we  preach.*  Jesus  also  went  regu- 
larly, as  we  have  already  seen,  to  the  great  relig- 
ious festivals  at  the  temple. 

From  the  means  contributed  to  the  support  of 
himself  and  his  followers  he  was  accustomed  to  give 
something  to  the  poor.  Thus  when  Judas  went  out 
from  the  last  paschal  supper,  after  the  Master  had 
said,  u  What  thou  doest,  do  quickly,"  some  of  the 
disciples  thought  it  meant  that  he  should  give  to 
the  poor.  The  Saviour  once  declared  that  "it  is 
more  blessed  to  give  than  to  receive."  In  spiritual 
things  he  and  his  apostles  were  constantly  the 
givers  ;  but  even  in  temporal  things,  where  it  was 
their  part  to  receive,  they  must  hot  be  denied  some 
share  in  the  higher  happiness  of  giving. 

In  every  way  Jesus  radiated  forth  an  atmosphere 
of  goodness  ;  he  presented  the  beauty  of  holiness  in 
living  incarnation.    We  can  see  that  to  be  near  him 

*  Compare  Stalker,  "  Imago  Christi." 


*\ 


J 


16  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

often  awakened  in  men  the  feeling  that  God  was 
near.  It  is  so  now.  Many  shrink  from  reading 
the  gospels  attentively  because  getting  near  to 
Jesus  makes  holiness  seem  so  real,  and  renders 
their  own  sinfulness  a  matter  of  painful  conscious- 
ness. 

^>  Yet  this  great  Teacher  of  spiritual  truth,  and 
model  of  public  worship  and  private  devotion,  was 
constantly  manifesting  a  deep  interest  in  Nature, 
and  in  the  outward  life  of  men.  He  watched  the 
dark,  violet-colored  lily  of  Galilee,  recalling  the 
purple  robes  of  Solomon  in  all  his  glory,  and  the 
minute  mustard-seed  which  grew  into  so  large  a 
plant.  He  saw  with  interest  the  little  sparrow  fly- 
ing or  falling  to  the  ground,  and  the  eagles  swoop- 
ing down  from  a  distance  upon  their  proper  food. 
He  loved  retirement  to  some  mountain  top.,  In  the 
last  summer  of  the  Galilean  ministry  he  kept  with- 
drawing from  Capernaum,  in  the  deep  and  heated 
caldron  of  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  far  below  the  level 
of  the  Mediterranean,  to  mountain  regions  in  every 
direction.  No  one  can  climb  the  high  hill  west  of 
Nazareth  without  fancying  that  often,  when  the 
day's  work  was  done,  the  young  carpenter  climbed 
to  that  summit,  gazing  with  delight  upon  the  blue 
Mediterranean,  then  in  another  direction  upon  the 
snow-clad  range  of  Mount  Lebanon,  and  far  and 
wide  over  the  Holy  Land. 

jnHJ  He  was  also  a  close  observer  of  ordinary  human 
pursuits.  He  drew  illustration  in  his  teaching 
from  patching  clothes,  and  bottling  wine,  and  sow- 
ing wheat,  and  reaping  when  the  stalks  were  white 
for   the    harvest,    and   from  boys  at  play.     Some 


s*K 


His  Personal  Character.  17 

great  painter  ought  to  have  given  us  that  scene, 
children    sitting    in    the   market-place  engaged  in 
their  sports,  while  Jesus  stood  by  and  looked  withrf 
kindly    face    upon    them.     He    dearly   loved  littlej^ 
children,  and  they  for  their  part  would  leap  from     A 
their  mothers'  arms  into  his  arms.     He  was  deeply   gLfoj)  Mt 
interested    in   human  enjoyments.     He  not  only  at-  ^  ^ 

tended  the  wedding  feast  at  Cana,  but  practically 
ministered  to  the  gratification  of  the  guests  and 
aided  the  bridegroom  in  hospitality*.  When  re- 
clining at  the  tables  of  the  rich,  at  feasts  made  in 
his  honor,  he  was  not  silent  nor  severe,  but  con- 
versed with  the  company,  and  introduced  religious 
lessons  suggested  by  the  circumstances.  It  is 
indeed  remarkable,  as  some  one  has  observed,  how 
many  of  his  most  striking  sayings  are  literally 
"  table-talk."  * 

Look  now  at  the  private  relations  of  Jesus,  con- 
cerning which  we  are  not  without  interesting 
points  of  information.  As  a  child  of  twelve  years, 
on  his  first  visit  to  Jerusalem,  he  was  found  in  one 
of  the  theological  colleges,  sitting  in  the  midst  of 
the  rabbinical  professors,  listening  intently  and 
eagerly  questioning  ;  and  all  present  were  amazed, 
not  simply  at  his  questions,  for  many  a  child  asks 
wonderful  questions,  but  "  at  his  understanding  and 
his  answers."  He  expressed  surprise  that  Joseph 
and  Mary  should  not  know  where  to  find  him,  for 
of  course  he  ought  to  be  in  his  Father's  house,  at 
the  temple.  He  really  was,  in  some  respects,  what 
many  boys  imagine  they, are,  wiser  than  his  par- 

*  Stalker. 


18  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

ents  5  and  yet,  as  an  obedient  child,  he  left  that  scene 
of  delightful  studies  and  went  back  with  them  to 
Nazareth,  and  was  subject  unto  them.  This  filial 
subjection  doubtless  continued  until  his  public 
ministry  began.  At  the  wedding  of  Cana  he  in- 
timated to  his  mother  that  she  must  not  now  seek 
to  control  his  actions.  The  language  employed  is 
not  unkind,  as  some  think  it  in  our  version.  For 
the  term  "  woman n  was  also  employed  by  him 
when  speaking  to  her  upon  the "  cross ;  and  the 
phrase  rendered  "  what  have  I  to  do  with  thee  ?  n 
jneans  rather,  what  have  we  in  common  ? — a  not  un- 
kind suggestion  that  he  had  now  entered  upon 
duties  which  she  must  not  attempt  to  control.  One 
of  the  well-known  Latin  hymns  of  the  great  me- 
diaeval period  gives  a  most  pathetic  picture  of  the 
mother  of  Jesus  standing  sad  and  tearful  beside  his 
cross.  The  Saviour  was  dying,  a  young  man  ;  and 
beholding  his  widowed  mother,  he  felt,  amid  all  his 
strange  sufferings,  the  loving  impulse  with  which 
every  young  man  can  sympathize,  to  make  some 
provision  for  her  earthly  future.  He  had  a  faithful 
friend  standing  by,  the  friend  of  his  bosom,  known 
among  all  the  rest  as  one  peculiarly  loved.  This 
friend  was  not  destitute,  but  had  a  home  of  his 
own;  and  to  him  the  dying  Teacher  commended  his 
mother,  that  henceforth  they  should  be  mother  and 
son.  The  simple  words  possess  for  all  earth's  sons 
and  all  earth's  mothers  an  unspeakable  pathos. 

We  have  just  been  reminded  that  certain  of  his 
followers  appear  as  in  a  peculiar  sense  the  friends 
of  Jesus.  So  it  is  expressly  stated  that  "Jesus 
loved  Martha,  and  her  sister,  and  Lazarus."     We 


His  Personal  Character.  19 

can  see  that  the  Twelve  and  some  other  friends 
were  familiar  with  him,  freely  offering  counsel  and 
even  making  complaint.  The  ardent  Peter,  when 
told  more  than  six  months  in  advance  that  the 
Master  was  going  to  Jerusalem  and  would  there  be 
crucified,  eagerly  remonstrated  :  u  Be  it  far  from 
thee,  Lord  ;  this  shall  never  be  unto  thee."  When 
the  loving  family  at  Bethany  first  appear  in  the 
history  Martha  says,  u  Lord,  carest  thou  not  that 
my  sister  hath  left  me  to  serve  alone  %  ,?  implying 
that  he  ought  to  care.  When  he  heard  of  Lazarus' 
sickness,  and  after  two  days'  delay  proposed  a  return 
to  Judea,  the  disciples  objected,  saying  that  the 
Jews  in  Jerusalem  had  recently  sought  to  stone 
him,  and  it  was  imprudent  to  go  thither  again. 
When  he  arrived  at  Bethany,  and  the  two  sisters 
met  him  separately,  each  of  them  said  in  a  com- 
plaining tone,  u  Lord,  if  thou  hadst  been  here,  my 
brother  had  not  died."  These  expressions  show 
that  he  admitted  his  friends  to  the  closest  intimacy. 
Great  as  was  the  reverence  awakened  by  his  char- 
acter and  teachings  and  works,  they  did  not  ex- 
clude the  familiarity  of  friendship.  And  we  ought 
to  note  how  exactly  Jesus  suited  himself  to  the 
disposition  of  his  friends  j  as  for  example  on  meet- 
ing the  sorrowing  sisters  at  Bethany,  he  reasoned 
with  the  active  and  energetic  Martha,  and  with  the 
gentle,  contemplative  Mary  he  wept  in  silent  sym- 
pathy. At  the  crisis  of  agony  in  Gethsemane 
he  wished  to  have  near  him  the  three  most 
cherished  friends  among  his  followers  j  as  any  one 
in  a  season  of  great  suffering  desires  to  be  much 
alone,  and  yet  to  have  dear  friends  close  by. 


20  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

This  great  instructor  of  mankind  was  a  notable 
Teacher  of  teachers.  The  twelve  disciples  were 
\yy  subjected  to  a  very  careful  and  protracted  training. 
We  can  discern  the  successive  stages.  He  first 
called  one  and  another  to  come  and  follow  him. 
After  some  months,  he  carefully  selected  twelve  of 
these,  to  be  his  special  companions,  and  in  the  com- 
ing time  his  messengers  and  representatives.  At 
the  time  of  this  choice  he  addressed  to  them  and  the 
multitude  the  wonderful  discourse  called  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  which  was  peculiarly  fitted  to  open 
up  before  them  the  true  nature  of  the  Messianic 
reign,  and  the  relation  of  his  teachings  to  the  law 
of  Moses  and  its  current  interpretations.  For  a 
long  time  the  Twelve  followed  him  about,  hearing 
all  his  instructions  to  public  assemblies  or  in  the 
homes  they  visited,  and  encouraged  to  question  him 
freely  in  private.  At  length  he  sent  them  out  on  a 
temporary  mission  in  Galilee,  to  practise  their  ap- 
pointed task  of  religious  instruction.  After  their 
return  he  spent  six  months  almost  wholly  in  seclu- 
sion, in  districts  outside  of  Galilee,  evidently  devot- 
ing his  time  mainly  to  careful  instruction  of  the 
Twelve,  and  at  length  beginning  to  tell  them  in 
confidence  how  differently  his  ministry  would  end 
from  their  expectations  concerning  the  Messiah. 
Observe  that  although  much  of  his  teaching  was 
private,  and  some  things  concerning  the  foreseen 
end  of  his  ministry  were  to  be  temporarily  kept  to 
themselves,  there  was  yet  nothing  here  of  that 
esoteric  teaching  which  some  ancient  philosophers 
practised,  directing  that  certain  truths  should  be 
kept    always    confined   to  an  inner   circle.     Jesus 


His  Personal  Character.  21 

expressly  told  his  disciples  that  what  they  heard 
in  the  ear  they  were  ultimately  to  proclaim  upon 
the  housetops,  and  carry  to  all  the  nations. 

The  Great  Teacher  showed  in  a  high  degree  that 
patience  upon  which  all  good  teaching  makes  large 
demands.  Yet  we  know  of  one  occasion  on  which 
he  was  much  displeased  with  the  Twelve.  He  had 
been  giving  instruction  on  the  important  subject  of 
divorce,  and  in  the  house  the  disciples  were  ques- 
tioning him  further.  Just  then  some  mothers 
brought  to  him  little  children  for  his  blessing,  as 
they  were  wont  to  do  with  a  revered  rabbi.  The 
disciples  were  unwilling  that  this  should  interrupt 
the  instructions  they  were  seeking  on  so  important 
a  practical  question,  and  so  they  rebuked  the 
mothers.  u  But  when  Jesus  saw  it,  he  was  moved 
with  indignation,"  at  their  repulsing  those  in  whom 
he  felt  so  deep  an  interest,  and  from  whom,  as 
examples  of  docility  and  loving  trustfulness,  they 
themselves  had  so  much  to  learn.  We  have  seen 
that  the  reverence  of  his  friends  did  not  prevent 
familiarity,  and  we  must  add  that  their  familiarity 
did  not  diminish  reverence.  As  the  end  drew  on, 
though  it  was  an  end  which  involved  apparent  fail- 
ure and  multiplied  ignominy,  both  friend  and  foe 
manifest  an  awe  that  ever  grows  upon  them,  and 
cannot  be  shaken  off.* 

We  may  next  notice  that  Jesus  treated  the  pub- 
lic authorities  with  deference  and  due  subjection. 
He  said  to  Peter  that  there  were  reasons  why  he 
might    have  claimed  exemption   from   paying   the 

Compare  Bushnell,  "  Nature  and  the  Supernatural." 


J 


22  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

annual  half-shekel  for  the  support  of  the  temple  ; 
and  yet  directed  him  to  pay  for  them  both.  He 
told  the  disciples  and  the  multitudes  to  do  what  the 
scribes  bade  them,  because  they  sat  on  Moses'  seat, 
were  recognized  interpreters  of  the  law,  but  not  to 
imitate  their  conduct.  By  a  skilful  and  promising 
plot,  representatives  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the 
Herodians,  or  supporters  of  the  Herod  dynasty, 
approached  him  together  one  day,  with  honeyed 
words  of  flattery,  asking,  "  Is  it  lawful  to  give 
tribute  unto  Caesar  or  not  ? "  They  wished  an 
answer,  yes  or  no,  and  thought  they  were  present- 
ing a  perfect  'dilemma.  If  he  had  said  yes,  the 
Pharisees  would  have  gone  out  among  the  Jews, 
many  of  whom  were  very  reluctant  to  recognize  the 
Roman  rule,  and  especially  to  pay  the  Roman  trib- 
ute, and  would  have  diligently  used  against  him  the 
offensive  statement  that  it  was  proper  to  pay  trib- 
ute to  Caesar.  If  he  had  said  no,  the  Herodians 
would  have  gone  to  the  JRoman  authorities,  and 
charged  him  with  encouraging  the  people  to  refuse 
payment  of  tribute,  a  point  on  which  the  Romans 
were  very  sensitive.  It  really  seemed  a  hopeless 
dilemma.  But  he  cut  through  the  midst  of  it  by 
pointing  out  a  distinction  between  civil  and  religi- 
ous duties,  of  which  they  had  never  thought,  and 
which  to  our  modern  world,  after  being  long  ob- 
scured, has  again  become  clear  and  cardinal,  "to 
\j  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  to  God  the 
things  that  are  God's." 

He  was  indeed  teaching  ideas  that  would  ulti- 
mately transform  society;  yet  he  was  no  violent  and 
revolutionary  reformer,  but  quietly  respected   the 


His  Personal  Character,  (I  23 


existing  authorities.  At  Gethsemane,  he  did  not 
simply  yield  to  force,  he  surrendered  to  representa- 
tives of.the  high  priest,  accompanied  by  Roman  sol- 
diers. /  Jesus  never  plunged  into  politics,  but  direct- 
ly concerned  himself  with  spiritual  ideas  and  influ- 
ences. By  this  course  he  has  actually  done  more 
for  civilization  than  could  possibly  have  resulted 
had  he  fallen  in  with  the  common  Jewish  expecta- 
tion and  become  a  civil  ruler.  The  indirect  influ- 
ence of  his  unworldly  and  spiritual  reign  is  helpful 
to  all  the  highest  interests  of  humanity.  Still,  he 
could  not  fail  to  be  deeply  moved  by  the  civil  and 
social,  as  well  as  the  religious  condition  of  the  cho- 
sen people.  And  when  he  wept  over  the  foreseen 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  it  was  doubtless  the  grief 
of  a  patriot  as  well  as  of  a  Saviour.  -^^ 

In  considering  the  association  of  Jesus  with  the   I 
people  at  large ,  we  are  struck  at  once  with  the  fact  that 
though  pure  and  sinless,  he  did  not  shrink  from  con- 
tact with  the  most  sinful  and  the  most  despised.     lie 
was  in  this  respect  the  very  opposite  of  the  Phari- 
sees.    Their  name  signifies  separatists.     Fundamen- 
tal in  their  conception  of  a  pious  life  was  the  idea 
of  scrupulously  avoiding  any  social  intercourse,  or 
even  the  slightest  contact,  with  persons  who  habitu- 
ally  violated  the  ceremonial  law,   as  well  as  with    / 
those     guilty     of    gross    immorality.      This     was   J 
the    idea    of    personal    purity    materialized,    ancf~ 
pushed   to    an   utter    extreme.     Accordingly,    the 
Pharisees  found  it  hard  to  believe  that  one  could  be 
a  prophet,  a  teacher  come  from  God,  who  would 
consent  to  eat  at  the  table  of  a  publican,  or  would 
allow  his  feet  to  be  washed  with  the  tears  of  a  fall- 


J 


24  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

en  woman.  Jesus  often  found  it  necessary  to  ex- 
plain and  vindicate  his  course  in  this  respect;  and 
it  was  for  this  purpose  that  on  one  occasion  he  gave 
the  three  beautiful  parables  which  tell  of  joy  at  the 
recovery  of  the  lost  sheep,  the  lost  coin,  the  lost  son. 
Contact  with  vile  people  is  proper  or  improper  ac- 
cording to  our  aim  and  the  probable  results.  It 
must  be  avoided  or  carefully  limited,  iff  of  such  a 
character  as  would  probably  assimilate  us  to  them. 
But  the  thoughtful  and  consistent  followers  of  Jesus 
have  been  moved  by  his  example  and  teachings  to 
far  more  of  kindly  effort  to  redeem  the  vile  than 
ever  existed  in  the  world  beyond  the  influence  of 
Christianity;  and  to  do  still  more  in  this  direction 
would  only  be  acting  according  to  his  spirit.  Jer- 
emy Taylor  has  said  that  Jesus  moved  among  the 
despised  of  humanity  like  sunshine,  which  falls 
among  foul  things  without  being  itself  defiled.  To 
imitate  this  in  our  measure  must  be  an  attainment 
full  of  blessedness  for  us  and  rich  in  blessing  to 
others.  Jesus  was  very  weary  with  months  of 
earnest  teaching  as  he  sat  that  day  beside  Jacob's 
well;  yet  he  aroused  himself  to  speak  most  kindly 
with  one  who  came  to  draw  water,  and  that  a 
woman  who  was  living  sinfully  with  a  man  not  her 
husband.  His  conversation  with  her  is  a  suggestive 
model  of  skill  in  the  introduction  of  religion  into  pri- 
vate conversation— one  of  the  finest  of  all  accomplish- 
ments for  Christian  men  and  women.  The  delicate 
tact  with  which  he  aroused  her  conscience,  and 
thus  turned  her  thoughts  away  from  the  mere  satis- 
faction of  bodily  thirst  to  the  water  of  eternal  life, 


His  Personal  Character.  25 

is  among  the  most  wonderful  touches  in  his  consum- 
mate teaching. 

Jesus  was  not  only  friendly  to  the  poor,  but  he 
evidently  counted  largely,  from  beginning  to  end, 
on  their  reception  of  his  influence  and  their  support 
of  his  movement.  He  has  been  called  "  the  poor 
man's  philosopher;  the  first  and  only  one  that  had  ever 
appeared."*  He  expected,  and  found,  the  chief 
results  of  his  ministry  among  the  poor,  the  masses 
of  mankind.  Even  ignorance  may  not  be  so  great 
a  hindrance  to  the  sympathetic  reception  of  moral 
and  spiritual  truth  as  a  sophisticated  culture,  and 
a  selfish  contentment  with  existing  social  and  moral 
conditions.  No  religious  movement  can  have  large 
and  blessed  results  which  does  not  adapt  itself  to 
the  poor.  No  Christians  are  worthy  to  bear  the 
name  of  their  Master,  who  do  not,  like  him,  delight 
in  preaching  the  gospel  to  the  poor,  and  in  minister- 
ing to  their  needs.  Yet  Jesus  was  no  partisan  of  \ 
the  poor.  He  also  mingled  freely  with  the  rich,  \ 
entering  with  equal  freedom  and  equal  sympathy,  I  y 
as  his  ministers  should  strive  to  do,  into  the  lowliest  I 
and  the  loftiest  homes. 

We  ought  to  notice  how  he  dealt  with  hypocrites, 
and  with  the  fanatical  multitudes.  Again  and  again 
he  withdrew  from  the  fanatical  excitement  of  great 
crowds  who  thought  themselves  his  followers,  so  as 
to  leave  time  for  such  feelings  to  subside.  Sober 
men  of  the  world  are  at  times  specially  disgusted 
with  certain  fanatics  they  hear  of,  and  tempted  to 
regard  all  apparentlv  earnest  piety  as  mere  fanati- 

*  Buslmell. 


s 


26  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 

cism.  They  ought  to  observe  how  carefully  the 
Founder  of  Christianity  repressed  everything  of  the 
kind.  The  worst  hypocrites  were  among  men  of 
high  station  or  influence.  These  hypocrites  Jesus 
rebuked  many  times,  and  in  burning  words  of 
righteous  indignation.  Some  have  thought  these 
words  out  of  harmony  with  his  characteristic  gentle- 
ness and  love.  But  it  is  right  to  abhor  and  hate  all 
forms  of  vile  wickedness,  however  we  may  pity  the 
humanity  that  lies  behind  them.  Many  of  his  con- 
temporaries imagined  that  the  prophet  of  Nazareth 
must  be  one  of  the  grand  old  prophets  come  to  life 
again.  And  it  is  noteworthy,  as  a  recent  writer 
remarks,*  that  some  thought  he  was  Jeremiah,  the 
tender  and  pathetic,  while  others  thought  he  was 
Elijah,  bold  and  stern  in  rebuking.  May  we  not 
suppose  that  these  had  only  observed  different 
manifestations  of  a  many-sided  character  ?  Or 
rather,  that  like  God  his  Father,  the  compassionate 
love  of  Jesus  towards  human  weakness  was  but  an- 
other aspect  of  the  same  essential  character  which 
showed  itself  in  burning  indignation  towards  human 
wickedness? 

Having  thus  gone  over  the  principal  relations 
which  Jesus  sustained  in  his  private  and  public  life, 
noticing  how  in  each  of  these  his  character  was 
manifested,  we  may  now  come  nearer  to  certain 
pergonal  traits  that  appear  throughout  the  history. 

The  humility  of  Jesus  stood  in  striking  contrast 
\s       'to    rabbinical   and    Pharisaic   pride.      Men    often 
greatly   wondered   at   his   words  and   actions,  his 

*  Stalker. 


His  Personal  Character,  27 

wisdom  and  power  j  they  compared  him  to  the  most 
celebrated  prophets,  they  expected  him  to  become 
a  more  splendid  king  than  David  or  Solomon ;  but 
he  was  gentle  and  humble.     Moreover,  he  himself 
made  the  most  extraordinary  claims.     u  When  the 
Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and   all  the 
angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  on  the  throne  of 
his    glory;  and   before    him    shall  be  gathered  all 
the  nations."     "  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen 
the  Father.'7     "  No  one  knoweth  the  Father,  save 
the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to 
reveal  him."     Yet    in   immediate    connection  with 
this  great  claim  he  said,      u  Take  my  yoke  upon 
you,  and  learn  from  me ;  for  I  am  meek  and  lowly 
in  heart."     It  was  indeed  Jesus  who  caused  humil- 
ity to  be    classed  among  the  virtues.     The  Greek 
word  thus  translated  had  in  Greek  literature  almost 
always  a  bad    sense,    at  best   sometimes   denoting 
modesty,  the  absence  of  arrogance  ;  the  Latin  word 
which  we  borrow  made  no  approach  to  a  good  sense; 
Christianity  gives  to    humility    a   notable   position 
among  virtues    and  graces.     Yet,  as  if  to  correct 
the  natural  tendency  to  misapprehension  in  regard 
to  this  virtue,   the  Saviour  was  always  eminently 
y  self-respecting,  and   spoke  and  acted  with  a  per- 
sonal dignity  which  even  his  enemies  could  not  but 
recognize.     When    questioned  by  Annas,  the    ex- 
high  priest,  about  his  teaching,  Jesus  answered  him, 
"  I  have  spoken  openly  to  the  world  j  I  ever  taught 
in  synagogues,  and  in  the   temple,  where  all  the 
Jews  come  together  ;  and  in  secret  spake  I  nothing. 
Why  askest  thou  me  f     Ask  them  that  have  heard 
me,  what  I  spake  unto  them."     To  this  dignified 


J 


28  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

answer  corresponds  his  dignified  silence  when 
brought  before  the  Sanhedrin.  He  knew  that  his 
condemnation  was  a  foregone  conclusion.  He  had 
resolved  to  go  straight  forward  to  the  crucifixion 
which  awaited  him.  He  would  not  condescend  to 
answer,  save  when  it  became  proper  to  make  the 
decisive  avowal  of  Messiah  ship.  Before  Pilate,  who 
was  himself  a  prisoner  to  his  own  previous  acts  of 
wrong-doing,  and  had  no  courage  to  decide  accord- 
ing to  his  own  sense  of  right,  Jesus  speaks  with 
dignified  compassion  and  quiet  superiority.  How- 
ever hard  most  of  us  may  find  it  to  combine  humil-  ^ 
ity  with  personal  dignity,  yet  in  the  Christian 
theory  and  in  the  Christian  Exemplar  they  blend 
in  perfect  harmony. 
^/  The  readiness  of  Jesus  to  forgive  was  often 
manifested.  Remember  his  lamentation  over  Jeru- 
salem: "  How  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy 
children  together,,  but  ye  would  not."  Eemember 
how  he  warned  Peter  that  headstrong  self-reliance 
would  lead  him  that  very  night  into  shameful  and 
repeated  denial  of  his  Master,  and  yet  how  soon 
afterwards  he  appeared  separately  to  the  fallen  but 
repentant  disciple,  forgiving  and  encouraging  him. 
For  the  Roman  soldiers  who  were  fastening  him  to 
the  cross  with  cruel  pangs,  he  prayed,  "  Father, 
forgive  them;  for  they  know  not  what  they  do." 
Yet  observe  in  these  very  words  the  intimation  that 
if  they  had  known  what  they  were  doing,  he  might 
not  have  asked  that  they  should  be  forgiven.  So 
he  said  in  substance  to  Pilate,  "  The  high  priest's 
sin  is  greater  than  thine."  Here  then  is  no  weak 
forgiveness   of  everybody  for  everything,    penitent 


His  Personal  Character.  29 

or  impenitent,  such  as  some  people  imagine  to  be 
set  forth  in  the  teachings  and  the  example  of  the 
Founder  of  Christianity. 

It  is  evident  that  his  nature  was  exceedingly 
sensitive.  On  one  occasion,  when  the  Pharisees  ^ 
showed  their  hostility  and  determination  not  to  be 
convinced,  we  are  told  that  u  he  sighed  deeply  in 
his  spirit."  When  predicting  some  months  in  ad- 
vance his  dread  baptism  of  suffering  he  added, 
"and  how  am  I  straitened  till  it  be  accomplished." 
Once  when  apparently  quite  out  of  heart  with  the 
unbelief  of  his  disciples  and  the  multitude,  he  said, 
"  0  faithless  generation,  how  long  shall  I  be  with 
you  1  how  long  shall  I  bear  with  you  ?  "  A  few 
days  before  the  crucifixion,  after  predicting  his 
speedy  death,  he  broke  out,  "  Now  is  my  soul 
troubled;  and  what  shall  I  say  ?  Father,  save  me 
from  this  hour  ?  but  for  this  cause  came  I  unto  this 
hour.  Father,  glorify  thy  name."  No  one  who 
ever  read  or  heard  the  sacred  story  can  forget  how 
in  Grethsemane  three  times  over  he  said,  u  If  it  be 
possible  " ;  how  on  the  cross  he  cried  with  a  loud 
voice,  u  Why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  %  "  Certainly 
these  are  impressive  proofs  that  his  nature  was  ex- 
quisitely sensitive.  And  yet  how  patient  he  was ! 
True  patience  is  a  very  different  thing  from  insen- 
sibility. Only  one  who  feels  sensitively  can  be 
nobly  patient.  In  general  Jesus  showed  great 
calmness.  And  an  occasional  utterance  of  grief 
and  pain  only  sets  that  habitual  calmness  in  a 
clearer  light.  The  world  has  dwelt  not  too  much 
but  too  exclusively  on  the  gentle  and  patient  traits 
of  the  Saviour's  character  j  and  we  do  well  to  re- 


30  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

mind  ourselves  that  he  also  exhibited  the  keenest 
l/  sensibility,  along  with  the  loftiest  moral  courage, 
the  noblest  strength  of  character.  An  English 
writer  *  has  produced  a  little  volume  entitled  "  The 
Manliness  of  Christ  n  ;  and  though  the  term  may 
strike  us  as  inadequate,  if  not  incongruous,  yet  it 
helps  to  impress  an  important  element  in  the  Sa- 
viour's character  5  for  people  are  ever  inclined  to  fall 
back  upon  the  notion  that  goodness,  innocence,  pa- 
tience, purity  belong  to  feeble  characters,  when  the 
fact  is  far  otherwise. 

•'  How  beauteous  were  the  marks  divine, 
That  in  thy  meekness  used  to  shine, 
That  lit  thy  lonely  pathway,  trod 
In  wondrous  love,  O  Son  of  God ! 

*'  Oh,  who  like  thee,  so  calm,  so  bright, 
So  pure,  so  made  to  live  in  light? 
Oh,  who  like  thee  did  ever  go  , 

So^patient  through  a  world  of  woe 

"  Oh,  who  like  thee  so  meekly  bore 
The  scorn,  the  scoffs  of  men,  before? 
So  meek,  forgiving,  godlike,  high, 
So  glorious  in  humility? 

"  Even  death,  which  sets  the  prisoner  free, 
Was  pang,  and  scoff,  and  scorn  to  thee ; 
Yet  love  through  all  thy  torture  glowed, 
And  mercy  with  thy  life-blood  flowed. 

u  Oh,  in  thy  light  be  mine  to  go, 
Illuming  all  my  way  of  woe ! 
And  give  me  ever  on  the  road 
To  trace  thy  footsteps,  Son  of  God. 


l/ 


With   all  its  difficulties  and  sorrows,  Jesus  de- 
lighted in  his  work.     He  loved  to  do  good,   even 

*  Thomas  Hughes. 


His  Personal  Character.  31 

when  it  appeared  to  be  on  the  smallest  scale.  The 
disciples  had  left  him  worn  and  weary  beside  Ja- 
cob's well,  and  on  their  return  found  him  alert, 
with  beaming  eyes  and  cheerful  voice.  They  won- 
dered whether  any  one  had  brought  him  food  in 
their  absence,  and  at  first  knew  not  the  meaning 
when  he  said,  "  I  have  food  to  eat  that  ye  know 
not  of.  My  food  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that  sent 
me,  and  to  accomplish  his  work."  He  had  found 
an  opportunity  to  do  good,  and  the  suggestion  of 
other  possibilities  in  those  whom  this  poor  woman 
might  influence.  Again  and  again  we  see  him 
shaking  off  weariness,  arousing  himself  with  inter- 
est and  delight,  when  there  was  any  opening'  for 
usefulness.  In  the  highest  degree  he  possessed 
and  exhibited  what  has  been  called  #  "  an  enthusi- 
asm of  humanity."  He  loved  men,  and  was  glad  to 
do  them  good.  He  loved  God,  and  it  was  a  joy  to 
do  him  honor. 

At   various  turning-points    of  his  ministry,   we  j 

find  the  Saviour  exercising  a  remarkable  prudence. 
He  knows  what  will  be  the  consequences  of  a  col- 
lision with  the  Jewish  authorities,  and  wishes  to 
delay  the  crisis  until  there  has  been  time  to  devel- 
op his  teachings  and  present  them  in  every  quar- 
ter of  the  Holy  Land,  and  to  train  his  chosen  dis- 
ciples. Accordingly,  during  his  early  ministry  in 
Judea,  when  he  knew  that  the  Pharisees  had  heard 
that  he  was  now  making  more  disciples  than  his  fore- 
runner, he  at  once  left  Judea  and  retired  to  Galilee. 
Towards  the  latter  part  of  the  ministry  in  Galilee 

*  Seeley,  uEcce  Homo." 


32  „  Jesus  of  Nazareth 

he  kept  withdrawing  into  surrounding  districts,  to 
avoid  further  exciting  the  alarm  of  Herod  the  te- 
trarch,  and  further  kindling  the  fanaticism  of  the 
common  people,  who  were  bent  on  making  him 
king,  and  might  by  their  excited  talk  have  drawn 
upon  him  the  jealousy  of  the  Roman  rulers.  Again 
and  again,  at  Nazareth  and  at  Jerusalem,  when 
some  angry  crowd  were  about  to  inflict  upon  him  mob 
violence,  he  quietly  went  away.  When  the  high 
priest  and  the  Sanhedrin  heard  what  had  happened 
to  Lazarus  in  Bethany,  and  deliberately  plotted  the 
death  of  Jesus,  he  left  Jerusalem  and  returned  no 
more  till  the  final  passover.  And  when  his  u  hour 
was  come,"  the  quiet  boldness  with  which  he 
moved  forward  was  but  the  same  moral  courage 
which  he  had  repeatedly  shown  in  prudently  with- 
drawing. However  men  may  stigmatize  or  ridi- 
cule prudence,  it  often  requires  and  manifests  the 
highest  courage.  Remember  too  that  his  prudence 
was  united  with  transparent  sincerity.  We  can 
clearly  see  combined  in  him,  what  he  bade  his  dis- 
ciples cultivate,  the  prudence  of  the  serpent  and  the  / 
simplicity  of  the  dove. 

And  now  the  most  remarkable  thing  about  this 
strong,  sensitive,  richly  developed,  beautifully  sym- 
metrical character,  the  wonderful  thing  which  can 
be  said  of  him  alone  among  all  the  good  and  noble 
of  human  history  is  this  :  his  character  stands  out 
as  faultless,  perfect.  So  thoroughly  symmetrical  is 
this  character  in  all  its  proportions  that  the 
careless  observer  does  not  realize  to  what  an 
extent  it  is  at  the  same  time  great  and  strong. 
Yet  as  it  grows  to  our  thoughtful  contemplation, 


His  Personal  Character.  33 

grows  exalted  and  sublime,  it  is  so  harmonious  as 
still  to  appear  simple  and  winning.  Can  it  indeed 
be  that  in  this  world  of  ours,  in  this  our  human 
nature,  there  has  been  a  character  really  and  ab- 
solutely perfect  ?  Men  who  do  not  believe  in  the 
Saviour's  divine  mission  and  personal  claims  have 
been  naturally  slow  to  admit  that  he  was  perfect  ; 
and  some  of  them  have  keenly  searched  among  all 
the  abounding  details  of  his  action  and  speech  for 
some  'ground  of  fault-finding.  All  that  I  know  of 
as  said  in  this  direction  at  the  present  day  would 
be  the  following  points.  Theodore  Parker  *  sug- 
gested that  his  driving  out  the  money-changers 
from  the  temple,  with  uplifted  scourge,  shows  un- 
seemly anger  and  violence.  But  to  ordinary  sober 
judgment  it  is  plain  that  the  anger  was  seemly 
enough  and  richly  deserved;  while  the  uplifted 
scourge  was  but  a  symbol  of  authority  and  reminder 
of  ill-desert,  like  many  an  object-lesson  taught  by  the 
old  prophets.  Some  have  complained  that  he  pro- 
nounced a  curse  upon  a  fig-tree  which  by  its  leaves 
made  pretence  of  having  also  fruit.  But  this  with- 
ered fig-tree  has  stood  as  another  object-lesson  to 
all  the  ages,  full  of  instruction  j  and  there  is  not 
the  slightest  indication  or  reason  to  suppose  that 
the  curse  was  pronounced  from  any  wrong  person- 
al feeling.  Francis  William  Newman,  skeptical 
brother  of  the  great  cardinal,  censured  the  Saviour 
for  quietly  yielding  himself  to  death  when  he  could 
so  easily  have  avoided  it.  But  this  reproach  was 
accepted  beforehand,  for  Jesus  declared  that  like  a 

*  Bualmell. 


34  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 

good  shepherd,  he  voluntarily  laid  down  his  life  for 
the  sheep.  A  well-known  American  lecturer 
against  the  Bible  once  almost  found  fault  with  Je- 
sus for  something  or  other,  but  I  really  do  not  even 
remember  what  it  was.  It  seems  idle  to  discuss,  and 
almost  useless  to  mention,  such  points  as  these ;  but 
the  fact  that  perverse  ingenuity  can  indicate  no 
semblance  of  fault  in  Jesus  that  will  bear  the  sim- 
plest inquiry,  only  brings  us  back  to  the  conclusion 
already  reached,  that  he  stands  out  before  us  as 
really  faultless  and  perfect.  During  his  ministry, 
the  Jewish  rulers  repeatedly  charged  him  with  de- 
ceiving the  people,  but  at  the  trial  before  the  San- 
hedrin,  they  could  adduce  nothing  but  silly  and 
contradictory  perversions  of  what  he  had  said,  and 
they  finally  condemned  him  only  upon  his  own  avowal 
that  he  was  the  Messiah,  which  the  high  priest  de- 
clared to  be  in  itself  an  act  of  blasphemy.  Before  all 
history,  Jesus  of  Nazareth  stands  as  sinless,  even 
as  he  himself  one  day  said  in  the  temple  court, 
u  Which  of  you  convicteth  me  of  sin?"  It  might 
indeed  be  suggested  that  the  evangelists  have  only 
carried  unusually  far  the  tendency  of  biographers 
to  keep  faults  in  the  background.  But  read,  and 
you  see  that  they  freely  record  varied  accusations 
made  against  him,  and  often  without  stopping  to 
reply;  while  they  relate  his  profoundest  sayings 
and  most  astonishing  actions  with  such  simplicity 
and  quietness  of  tone  as  to  constitute  a  unique  lit- 
erary phenomenon. 

Yet  this  perfect  character  stands  before  us  as  in- 
viting imitation.  Its  outward  conditions  do  not 
withdraw  him  from  our  sympathy  and  make  imita- 


His  Personal  Character.  35 

tion  seem  difficult,  for  he  did  not  live  as  a  king,  or 
as  a  retired  student,  or  a  recluse  ascetic.  His  ex- 
ample is  not  like  a  copy  set  with  intricate  flour- 
ishes, but  in  clear  and  simple  lines,  perfectly  beau- 
tiful, but  not  discouraging  the  effort  to  imitate.* 
Ofhim  alone  among  all  ethical  teachers  can  it  be 
said  that  to  imitate  his  example  and  to  obey  his 
precepts  would  amount  to  precisely  the  same  thigg* 
It  is  a  remarkable  statement  which  John  Stuart 
Mill,  trained  from  childhood  to  disbelief  of  the 
Bible,  makes  in  one  of  his  posthumous  u  Essays  on 
Religion,"  that  it  would  not  even  now  u  be  easy, 
even  for  an  unbeliever,  to  find  a  better  translation 
of  the  rule  of  virtue  from  the  abstract  into  the  con- 
crete, than  to  endeavor  so  to  live  that  Christ  would 
approve  our  life." 

The  German  scholar  Rothe  is  quoted  as  saying 
in  his  work  on  Ethics,  u  I  know  no  other  ground 
on  which  I  could  anchor  my  whole  being,  and  par- 
ticularly my  speculations,  except  that  historical 
phenomenon,  Jesus  Christ.  He  is  to  me  the  un- 
impeachable Holy  of  Holies  of  humanity,  .... 
and  a  sun-rising  in  history  whence  has  come  the 
light  by  which  we  see  the  world." 

How  strongly  attractive,  to  all  who  will  dwell 
upon  it  thoughtfully,  is  the  personality  of  Jesus  the 
Saviour.  All  around  us  are  children  who  as  they 
study  the  Sunday  School  lessons  from  the  gospels, 
feel  their  tender  hearts  drawn  out  to  love  Jesus,  to 
confide  in  him,  to  follow  him  though  unseen.  And 
for  us  all,  however  mature  and  instructed,  it  would 

*Isaac  Barrow. 


X 


36  Jesus  of  "Nazareth. 

assuredly  be  the  best  fruit  of  the  historical  spirit, 
the  summit  of  true  philosophy,  the  crown  of  all 
culture,  to  read  afresh  these  gospel  records  with 
^the  simplicity  of  a  little  child,  and  learn  to  love  and 
confide  in  Jesus. 


II. 


Ch  (Stbual  Cmfmtgs  0f  Jfmts, 


37 


THE   ETHICAL   TEACHINGS   OF  JESUS. 


T  T  is  a  notable  characteristic  of  Christianity  that 
■*•  the  ethical  teachings  of  its  Founder  are  insepa- 
rably connected  with  his  religious  teachings.  u  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself "  is  not  given  by 
him  as  a  separate  and  detached  precept,  but  as  one 
of  two.  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  u/ 
all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
mind.  This  is  the  great  and  first  commandment. 
And  a  second  like  unto  it  is  this,  thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself.  On  these  two  command- 
ments hangeth  the  whole  law  and  the  prophets." 
Observe  that  the  two  precepts  are  not  simply  placed 
side  by  side,  they  are  united:  "on  these  two.''  In  / 
like  manner  the  first  four  of  the  ten  commandments 
present  duties  to  God,  the  others  present  duties  to 
men;  the  opening  petitions  of  the  Lord's  Prayer 
are  that  God  may  be  honored,  the  others  that  we 
may  be  blessed.  In  the  great  judgment  scene  de- 
scribed by  Jesus,  where  he  himself  will  sit  as  king, 
the  rewards  and  punishments  of  the  future  life  are 
made  to  turn  upon  the  performance  or  the  neglect 
of  duties  to  him  in  the  person  of  his  people.  Every- 
thing religious  in  Christianity  is  made  to  furnish  a 
motive  to  morality. 


v/ 


40  Jesus  of  Nazarcil). 

We  all  condemn  the  fanatics  who  would  make 
religion  sufficient  without  ethics.  Some  teachings 
of  this  sort  are  absurd,  and  some  disgusting.  But 
on  the  other  hand,  shall  we  think  it  wise  to  regard 
ethics  as  sufficient  without  religion !  Is  it  not  true 
that  he  who  would  divorce  religion  and  morality  is 
an  enemy  to  religion,  and  at  best  only  a  mistaken 
friend  to  morality  1 

Among  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  in  the  historical 
period,  these  two  were  little  connected.  They 
were  not  even  generally  taught  by  the  same  per- 
sons; the  priests  taught  religion,  the  philosophers 
taught  morality.  Some  of  the  actions  ascribed  to 
the  deities  themselves  were  grossly  immoral.  The 
Jewish  contemporaries  of  Jesus  were  severely  re- 
buked by  him  for  their  traditional  directions  as  to 
Corban.  A  man  might  refuse 'food  to  his  own  father 
by  saying  that  this  particular  food  was  Corban,  a 
thing  offered  to  God,  thus  setting  aside  for  the  sake 
of  a  supposed  religious  service  the  profound  moral 
obligation  and  the  express  commandment  of  God's 
law,  to  honor  father  and  mother.  So  likewise  Jesus 
pronounced  woes  upon  the  hypocritical  Pharisees 
for  scrupulously  tithing  the  least  important  vege- 
tables that  grew  in  their  gardens,  and  then  leaving 
u  undone  the  weightier  matters  of  the  law,  justice 
and  mercy  and  faith";  for  carefully  cleansing  the 
outside  of  the  cup  and  the  dish,  while  their  contents 
were  the  product  of  extortion  and  excess. 

,  Ethical  obligation,  according  to  the  Saviour's 
teachings,  is  enforced  by  the  yet  higher  religious 
obligation.  Our  duties  to  men  are  really  a  part  of 
our  all-comprehensive  duty  to  God.      Why  must  I 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  ,41 

love  my  neighbor  as  myself?  If  it  be  placed  on 
utilitarian  grounds,  meaning  personal  utility,  then  I 
ought  to  love  my  neighbor  as  myself  because  it  will 
benefit  me,  that  is,  because  I  love  myself  better 
than  my  neighbor.  If  the  utility  consulted  be  gen- 
eral, then  why  ought  I  to  care  as  much- for  the  gen- 
eral good  as  for  my  own  ?  We  are  back  where  we 
started.  Herbert  Spencer,  with  all  the  ability  and 
earnestness  shown  in  his  "  Data  of  Ethics/'  makes 
a  reply  which  I  think  men  in  general  cannot  recog- 
nize as  philosophically  conclusive  or  practically 
cogent.  Natural  sympathy  with  others,  we  are, 
told,  if  frequently  exercised,  hardens  'by  force  of 
habit  into  altruism,  a  sense  of  obligation  to  others. 
Is  that  all?  Nay,  I  must  love  my  neighbor  as 
myself  because  I  am  the  creature  and  the  child 
of  God,  whom  I  must  love  with  all  my  heart, 
more  than  my  neighbor  and  more  than  myself. 
Shall  we  then,  it  may  be  asked,  accuse  every  man 
who  is  not  definitely  religious  of  being  gravely  im- 
moral ?  Nay,  individual  moral  convictions  may  be 
largely    the    result    of  inheritance,    education  and  V 

present  environment,  and  may  subsist  notwithstand- 
ing the  individual  lack  of  those  religious  convictions 
which  are  their  proper,  and,  as  a  general  fact,  their 
actual  support. 

Observe  further  that  Jesus  not  only  tells  us 
what  we  ought  to  do,  but  shows  how  we  may  be  able 
to  do  so.  He  presents  in  his  own  character  and  life 
an  inspiring  example,  satisfying  our  noblest  ideal 
of  morality,  and  yet  conforming  itself  to  the  con- 
ditions of  our  own  existence.  He  tells  how  we  may 
obtain  divine  assistance  in  obeying    his    precepts. 


> 


• 


42  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

Many  other  teachers  have  given  wholesome  pre- 
cepts, but  left  men  to  keep  them  in  their  unaided 
strength.  Jesus  tells  of  a  divinely- wrought  change 
so  thorough  as  to  be  called  a  new  birth,  of  a  divine 
spiritual  help  which  our  heavenly  Father  will 
readily  give.  It  is  in  this,  and  not  simply  in  the 
great  superiority  of  his  precepts,  that  we  find  the 
unapproachable  excellence  of  the  Christian  ethics. 

In  connection  with  this  point  we  must  remember 
that  Jesus  constantly  pre-supposes  the  sinfulness  of 
human  nature.  Many  ethical  precepts,  and  even 
whole  systems  of  ethics,  appear  to  assume  that  men 
have  no  particular  bias  toward  evil.  But  it  is  far 
otherwise  with  him  j  and  he  meets  the  demands  of 
the  situation  by  providing  atonement,  renewal  and 
divine  sanctification. 

Another  thing  quite  without  parallel  is  the 
unique  authority  which  these  ethical  instructions 
derive  from  the  faultless  life  and  character  of  the 
Teacher  himself.  Every  other  instructor  in  morals 
comes  manifestly  short  of  his  own  standard,  as  in- 
deed befalls  the  teacher  in  every  other  department 
of  practical  human  exertion.  Even  the  lessons 
given  by  the  best  parents  to  their  children  are  sub- 
ject to  inevitable  discount  on  account  of  the  faults 
in  parental  character  and  conduct  of  which  the 
children  are  aware  and  the  parents  are  conscious. 
Here  alone  among  all  moral  instructors  the  example 
is  absolutely  equal  to  the  precept. 

Are  the  ethical  teachings  of  Jesus  original  t 
Some  have  thought  this  a  question  of  great  import- 
ance. Opponents  have  taken  immense  pains  to 
show   that    certain    of  his    precepts    find    a  partial 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  43 

parallel  in  previously  existing  pagan  writings  ;  and 
some  Christian  apologists  have  been  nervously  un- 
willing to  recognize  the  fact.  It  needs  no  great 
reflection  to  see  that  a  wise  teacher  of  morals  must 
bring  his  instructions  into  close  connection  with 
what  men  already  know,  or  what  they  will  in- 
stinctively recognize  as  true  when  suggested  by  his 
lessons.  If  you  are  teaching  a  child,  you  do  not 
present  ideas  entirely  apart  from  and  above  the 
child's  previous  consciousness ;  you  try  to  link  the 
new  thoughts  to  what  the  child  has  thought  of  be- 
fore. We  need  not  then  be  at  all  unwilling  to 
admit  that  for  the  most  part  Jesus  only  carried 
farther  and  lifted  higher  and  extended  more  widely 
the  views  of  ethical  truth  which  had  been  dimly 
caught  by  the  universal  human  mind,  or  had  at 
least  been  seen  by  the  loftiest  souls.  This  was 
but  a  part  of  the  wisdom  of  his  teachings.  The 
most  familiar  and  striking  instance  is  the  so-called 
golden  rule,  something  more  or  less  similar  to  which 
is  ascribed  to  various  contemporaries  of  Jesus 
and  to  earlier  teachers.  Thus  Hillel  said,  u  What 
is  hateful  to  thee,  do  not  do  to  another,"  and  he 
was  but  repeating  a  passage  in  the  book  of  Tobit, 
u  What  thou  hatest,  do  to  no  one."  A  Greek 
biographer  of  Aristotle  relates  that  being  asked 
how  we  should  behave  towards  our  friends  he 
answered,  "  As  we  should  wish  them  to  behave 
towards  us "  ;  and  Isocrates  had  previously  said, 
u  What  you  are  angry  at  when  inflicted  on  you  by 
others,  this  do  not  do  to  others."  A  similar  neg- 
ative form  of  the  precept  is  also  frequently  quoted 
from  Confucius,   u  What  you  do  not  like  when  dona 


44  Jesus  of  Xazarcth. 

to  yourself,  do  not  do  to  others."  But  Confucius 
really  taught,  though  not  in  form,  the  positive  side 
of  the  same  idea.  A  follower  asked,  "  Is  there  one 
word  which  may  serve  as  a  rule  of  practice  for  all 
one's  life  ?  v  Confucius  replied,  u  Is  not  recipro- 
city such  a  word  %  What  you  do  not  want  done  to 
yourself,  do  not  do  to  others."  Dr.  R.  H.  Graves, 
a  distinguished  missionary  for  many  years  in  Can- 
ton, who  went  from  Baltimore,  replies  to  my  in- 
quiries that  u  reciprocity  v  seems  to  be  a  fairly 
correct  translation.  Arid  this  saying  of  the  Ana* 
lects  is  in  the  doctrine  of  the  mean  so  illustrated  as 
to  leave  no  doubt  that  Confucius  intended  a  posL 
tive,  and  not  merely  a  negative  precept.  I  have 
taken  pains  to  bring  out  this  fact  as  a  matter  of  sim- 
ple justice  and  exact  truth.  And  indeed  if  we  did 
not  gladly  "  seize  upon  truth  where'er  'tis  found," 
we  should  not  be  faithful  to  the  spirit  of  Jesus. 

A  recent  writer  *  has  pointed  out  that  the  Chris- 
tian ethical  system  harmoniously  combines  prin- 
ciples which  had  been  separately  emphasized  by  the 
Greek  philosophers.  The  Epicurean  laid  stress  on 
self-love;  the  Stoic  on  love  for  others;  the  Platonist 
on  love  to  God,  in  a  certain  limited  sense.  There 
can  indeed  be  no  basis  for  moral  conduct  other  than 
"  the  love  of  self,  the  love  of  humanity,  the  love  of 
God;  and  the  religion  which  unites  these  has  become 
the  foundation  of  absolute  morality."  This  is  not  at 
all  saying  that  Jesus  derived  these  ideas  from  the 
pagan  philosophers.  In  fact  they  reside  in  the 
moral  nature  of  man,  and  his  relations  to  the  nature 

♦Mathesou,  "  Landmarks  of  New  Testament  Morality." 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  45 

of  things  and  to  the  Creator.  Jesus  combines 
in  harmonious  completeness  truths  which  one  or 
another  had  separately  and  imperfectly  taught. 

The  Old  Testament  ethical  teachings  he  assumes 
as  already  received  among  his  hearers,  and  in  a 
general  way  endorses.  The  two  foundation  pre- 
cepts, as  to  love  of  God  and  love  of  our  neighbor, 
were  both  drawn  from  the  law  of  Moses,  though  not 
there  given  together,  nor  either  of  them  presented 
as  fundamental.  But  have  we  not  been  frequently 
told  of  late  that  Jesus  undertook  to  revolutionize 
the  Old  Testament  ethics  1  Did  he  not  supplant 
the  law  of  Moses  by  his  own  authoritative  and 
better  teachings  %  No,  nothing  of  the  kind.  He 
expressly  declared  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
that  he  came  not  to  destroy  the  law,  as  some  Jews 
imagined  the  Messiah  would  do  in  order  to  make 
life  easier,  but  came  to  complete  the  law.  And  the 
examples  which  follow  this  statement  are  not  at 
all  examples  of  teaching  contrary  to  the  law  of 
Moses,  but  in  every  case  of  going  further  in  the 
same  direction.  Thus  the  law  condemned  killing; 
he  condemns  hate  and  anger.  The  law  forbade 
adultery;  he  declared  that  a  lustful  look  is  virtual 
adultery.  The  law  forbade  false  swearing;  he  goes 
further  and  commands  not  to  swear  at  all.  The 
only  saying  he  condemns  is  the  phrase,  "and  hate 
thine  enemy";  but  this  was  not  a  part  of  the  law,  it 
was  a  Rabbinical  addition,  u  Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor,  and  hate  thine  enemy."  And  the  only 
case  in  which  he  appears  to  condemn  an  ethical 
teaching  actually  found  in  the  Old  Testament  is 
really  to  the  same  effect  as  the  others.     The  Mosaic 


46  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

law  of  divorce  was  really  a  restriction  upon  the 
otherwise  existing  facility  of  divorce,  in  that  the 
preparation  of  a  document  gave  time  for  reflection, 
and  the  possession  of  it  afforded  some  protection  to 
the  wife  turned  away.  Jesus  was  going  further  in 
the  same  direction  when  he  restricted  divorce  within 
narrower  limits.  And  while  he  said  that  Moses  for 
the  hardness  of  their  hearts  allowed  divorce  for 
various  causes,  his  own  teaching  expressly  went 
back  to  the  original  constitution  of  human  beings  as 
laid  down  in  the  Old  Testament.  There  is  thus  no 
ground  for  the  assertion  that  Jesus  taught  as  a 
revolutionary  reformer,  or  proposed  to  set  aside  the 
Old  Testament  ethics  as  essentially  erroneous.  He 
always  went  further  in  the  same  direction,  he  com- 
pleted the  law. 

It  is  often  asserted  by  some  modern  writers  that 
the  Founder  of  Christianity  derived  much  of  his* 
teaching  from  the  current  traditions  of  Rabbinical 
sayings,  as  shown  by  the  existence  of  similar  ideas 
or  expressions  in  the  Talmud  and  other  late  Jewish 
writings.  The  alleged  proofs  of  this  indebtedness 
are  few  and  curiously  inadequate.  It  is  folly  to 
say  that  Jesus  derived  the  golden  rule  from  his 
older  contemporary,  Hillel,  for  we  have  seen  that  it 
existed  centuries  before.  The  statement  is  fre- 
quently made  that  the  Lord's  Prayer  is  all  found  in 
the  Talmud  or  in  the  liturgies  now  used  in  syna- 
gogues. I  have  investigated  all  the  proofs  of  this 
adduced  by  accessible  writers,  and  the  facts  are  as 
follows:  the  only  exact  parallels  presented  in  the 
Talmud  and  the  liturgies  are  to  the  address,  u  Our 
Father,  who  art  in  heaven,"  and  the  two  petitions, 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  47 

u  Hallowed  be  thy  name/7  and  "  Bring  us  not  into 
temptation."     There  are  phrases  somewhat  resem- 
bling  "  Thy  kingdom  come/'  and  u  Deliver  us  from 
the  evil  one.''     There  is  no  parallel  to  u  Thy  will 
be  done,  as   in  heaven,    so   on  earth/'  or  to  u  Give 
us    this    day    our  daily    bread/7  or  to  the  petition 
which  Jesus  emphasized  by  repeating  it   after  the 
prayer,  "  Forgive   us    our   debts,  as   we  also   have 
forgiven  our  debtors."     Thus  the  most  characteris- 
tic petitions  of  the  prayer  are  wholly  without  Jewish 
parallel,  and  the  scattered  phrases  similar  to  some 
of  its  expressions  are  such  as  devout    Jews   could 
hardly  fail  sometimes  to  employ.     The  image  of  the    j     j^J 
mote   and  the  beam,  and  two  or  three  other  expres-  )\nL 
sions  elsewhere  employed  by  Jesus,  are  found  in  the 
Talmud.     They  may  have  been  proverbial.     Or  it 
is   entirely  possible   that  the  Talmud  and  other  late 
Jewish   writings   really    borrowed    sometimes   from 
the     New    Testament.     The    Jews    in    Alexandria 
early  borrowed  largely  from  the  Greek  philosophers, 
and    at  a  later  period  the  Jews  are  said  to  have 
borrowed  from  the  Arabs;  why  might  they  not  adopt 
an    occasional    phrase    from  the  Christian  writers, 
whom  they  could  so  easily  claim  as  really  of  their 
own    race?     Thus    the    charge    of  indebtedness  to 
Ilillel,    or  to   the   traditions   in  general,  so  far  as  I 
can  find  evidence,  quite  breaks  down.* 

Let  us  next  consider  that  the  ethical  teachings 
of  Jesus  do  not  usually  undertake  to  give  mere  rules, 
but  to  set  forth  principles.  The  Jewish  traditions 
had   run   everything    into    rules.     They    called    it 

*Coinp.  Delitzsch,  «.'  Jesus  and  Hillel." 


48  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

making  a  fence  around  the  law,  to  encompass  it 
with  all  manner  of  minute  directions,  which  would 
keep  men  away  from  breaking  the  law.  It  is  a 
general  tendency  of  mankind  to  save  themselves  the 
trouble  of  thinking,  by  expressing  principles  in  the 
form  of  rules.  Many  schools  and  some  colleges 
undertake  to  regulate  the  whole  behavior  of  the 
student  by  a  set  of  rules;  and  churches  sometimes 
show  the  same  tendency.  Jesus  evidently  set  him- 
■J  self  against  this  disposition.  He  did  not  wish  his 
followers  to  be  burdened  by  stiff  and  narrow  rules; 
he  taught  them  principles,  which  are  at  once  more 
comprehensive  and  more  flexible.  And  the  think- 
ing which  is  required  in  order  to  .apply  prin- 
ciples brings  with  it  a  most  valuable  part  of  our 
moral  discipline. 

Some  sayings  of  Jesus  have  often  been  taken  for 
rules  which  were  meant  only  as  striking  statements 
of  a  principle;  for  example,  u  Whosoever  smiteth 
thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also." 
If  any  proof  be  needed  that  this  was  not  meant  as  a 
rule,  let  us  judge  of  the  Saviour's  meaning  from  the 
course  which  he  himself  pursued,  for  he,  as  we  have 
said  before,  is  the  one  teacher  whose  example  never 
fell  short  of  his  precepts.  When  one  of  the  high 
priest's  officers  struck  him  at  the  trial,  we  do  not 
read  that  he  turned  the  other  cheek.  He  calmly 
remonstrated:  "If  I  have  spoken  evil,  bear  witness 
of  the  evil;  but  if  well,  why  smitest  thou  me? w 
Here,  as  in  many  other  cases,  we  can  interpret  his 
saying  by  his  action.  In  like  manner  he  said, 
u  Resist  not  him  that  is  evil;  "  and  many  have  taken 
this  as  a  rule  and  have  inferred  that  war  is  always 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  49 

wrong,  and  that  a  man  must  never  defend  himself 
when  attacked.  Yet  Jesus  did  not  tell  the  believing 
centurion  at  Capernaum  to  abandon  his  calling,  nor 
in  any  case  intimate  that  it  was  wrong  to  be  a  sol- 
dier. We  must  remember  that  the  Saviour  was 
often  a  field-preacher,  or  a  preacher  in  public 
squares.  It  was  necessary  to  hold  the  attention  of 
his  audience,  whom  no  decorum  restrained  from 
leaving.  Some  had  never  heard  him  before, 
some  would  never  hear  him  again;  it  was  necessary 
to  drive  a  truth  into  unsympathetic  minds,  to  fix  it 
there  in  permanent  remembrance.  He  did  this 
partly  by  a  great  variety  of  images  and  illustrations, 
and  partly  by  paradoxical  statements  which  would 
compel  reflection  and  ensure  recollection.  Thus 
the  saying,  "  Turn  to  him  the  other  cheek  also,'? 
has  been  very  often  misunderstood,  and  may  have 
been  misunderstood  by  some  of  those  who  first 
heard  it;  but  did  any  one  ever  forget  that  saying! 
Better  that  many  should  misunderstand,  than  that 
none  should  remember.  We  interpret  such  sayings 
by  their  general  connection,  or  by  the  Saviour's  own 
example,  or  his  teaching  on  other  occasions.  This 
is  a  very  different  thing  from  explaining  away  his 
teachings  because  not  in  accordance  with  our  views 
or  wishes;  this  is  only  trying  to  determine  what  he 
really  meant.  He  said,  "  Swear  not  at  all,"  and 
many  persons,  including  some  devoted  Christians, 
have  understood  that  he  forbids  taking  an  oath  in  a 
court  of  justice.  Yet  they  ought  to  have  noticed 
that  he  himself  did  that  very  thing.  The  high 
priest  presiding  in  the  Sanhedrin  said,  "  1  put  thee 
on  oath  by  the  living  God,  that  thou  tell  us  whether 


50  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  To  answer 
at  all  was  to  answer  on  oath;  and  Jesus  answered. 
So  then  his  prohibition  of  swearing  must  have  re- 
lated to  the  sadly  common  use  of  oaths  in  ordinary 
conversation.     His  example  interprets  his  precept. 

Again  he  said,  "  Give  to  him  that  asketh  thee." 
People  suppose  that  here  is  a  rule  for  unrestricted 
observance,  though  perhaps  no  one  in  real  life  ever 
attempted  to  carry  it  out.  But  in  the  same  discourse 
he  said,  u  Ask,  and  it  shall  be  given  you."  In  this 
latter  case  he  goes  on  to  compare  the  heavenly 
Father's  giving  to  that  of  parents.  These,  with  all 
their  human  infirmity,  u  know  how "  to  give  good 
things  to  their  children,  and  will  not  weakly  give 
what  the  children  ask  through  mistake;  much  more 
must  the  Father  in  heaven  know  how  to  give,  and 
withhold  where  that  would  be  truer  kindness.  Then 
if  the  promise  as  to  God's  giving  what  we  ask  is  lim- 
ited by  the  nature  of  the  case,  so  must  be  the  direc- 
tion to  give  to  others  what  they  ask  of  us.  He  also 
says,  u  Love  your  enemies.  .  .  .  that  ye  may  be 
sons  of  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven."  Yet  the 
heavenly  Father  does  not  love  enemies  as  he  loves 
friends;  he  cannot  love  enemies  with  a  love  of  com- 
placency, as  he  loves  the  obedient  and  holy.  "  He 
maketh  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  and  the  good, 
and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and  the  unjust."  So 
we  should  love  our  enemies,  and  gladly  do  them 
good;  but  this  does  not  mean  that  we  ought  to  love 
them  as  we  love  our  friends. 

In  like  manner  then  we  must  interpret  what  the 
Saviour  said  as  to  revenge.  The  law  of  Moses 
confined  the  requital  of  injuries  to  exact  retaliation, 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  51 

u  an  eye  for  an  eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth,"  while 
natural  human  passion  would  tend  to  make  the 
requital  far  surpass  the  injury.  Jesus  goes  further 
in  the  same  direction  as  the  law,  and  entirely  for-  / 
bids  revenge.  So  great  an  evil  is  revenge,  so  care- 
fully must  we  avoid  it,  that  he  says,  better  give  the 
litigant  the  exempted  garment  as  well' as  the  other, 
better  invite  still  further  exactions  from  the  im- 
pressing officer,  better  turn  the  other  cheek  for  a 
second  blow,  than  to  practise  revenge.  I  repeat, 
we  must  not  explain  away  the  Saviour's  sayings 
to  suit  our  own  notions,  but  we  must  seek  to  ascertain 
his  real  meaning.  And  I  think  it  is  clear  that  some 
of  these  sayings  were  not  at  all  designed  to  be  taken 
as  rules,  but  were  only  a  paradoxical  or  otherwise 
striking  expression  of  a  principle. 

Because  of  these  paradoxical  expressions  many 
have  declared  the  morality  taught  by  Jesus  to  be 
unpractical,  and  so  have  disregarded  any  and  all 
of  his  teachings  as  much  as  they  please.  Some 
sincerely  devout  persons  have  excused  themselves 
for  falling  short  of  other  precepts  on  the  ground 
that  several  of  his  sayings  could  not  be  literally 
obeyed.  Some  Christians  have  made  a  point  of 
refusing  to  bear  arms,  or  to  practise  any  sort  of 
resistance  to  wrong.  Count  Tolstoi,  a  man  of  great 
imagination  and  dramatic  power,  but  morbid  and  a 
trifle  fantastical,  supposes  himself  to  have  discovered, 
as  a  new  thing  in  the  world,  that  Jesus  meant  these 
paradoxical  statements  of  a  principle  for  precise 
rules.  He  does  not  know  that  the  same  notion  has 
been  held  by  some  persons  in  almost  every  age  and 
country.     And  the  gifted  old  nobleman  tries  to  live 


52  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

according  to  his  discovery,  so  far  as  his   own  wiser 
instincts  and  the  control  of  those  around  him   will 
allow.     Tell  him  that  if  such  notions  were  generally 
adopted  it  would  break  up  society,   and  like   many 
others  of  his  countrymen  at  the  present   day,    he 
would    reply  that  society  ought  to  be  completely 
demolished,  so'  that   we  may   see  if  the   survivors 
cannot    build    something  better.     In   like    manner 
Ibsen  in  one  of  his  dramas  makes  the  hero   attempt 
to  act  upon  these  sayings  as  rules,   but   shows   that 
the  result  must  be  to  crush  the  individual   attempt- 
ing it,  and  supposes  himself  thereby   to   prove   that 
the    existing    constitution   of  society    in    Christian 
countries  is  wholly  contrary  to  the  real  teachings  of 
the  Founder  of  Christianity.     But   did  Jesus  ever 
mean   thus   to   teach  %     Has  he   not   been    simply 
misunderstood  f 

We  turn  now  to  consider  the  great  motive  which  % 
Jesus  connects  with  his  ethical  teachings.  That 
motive,  as  already  intimated,  and  as  well  known,  is 
Love.  The  love  of  God  is  to  be  supreme.  The 
love  of  one's  neighbor  is  to  be  in  equipoise  with  the 
love  of  self.  This  makes  a  distinct  recognition  of 
self-love  as  essentially  right.  And  Jesus  elsewhere 
appeals  to  self-interest  in  the  highest  sense,  saying, 
11  It  is  profitable  for  thee,"  "  What  shall  it  profit  a 
man  !  n  Nor  was  this  self-love  forbidden  by  the  self- 
renunciation  which  he  enjoined.  One  who  proposed 
to  be  his  follower  must  renounce  himself,  and  take 
up  his  cross,  and  follow  on  as  ready  to  be  crucified. 
And  so  it  is  added,  "  Whosoever  shall  lose  his  life 
for  my  sake  shall  find  it.''  Self-renunciation  for  his 
sake   was   thus  encouraged  by  a  higher  self-love. 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  53 

In  sinful  beings  self-love  constantly  gravitates 
downwards  towards  selfishness.  The  remedy  is  to 
keep  it  balanced  by  love  of  our  neighbor,  while  love 
to  God  is  exalted  above  both,  and  holds  them  in 
symmetrical  relation.  A  man's  duties  to  himself, 
as  accordant  with  and  implied  in  Christ's  teachings, 
would  form  a  wholesome  subject  of  reflection  and 
discussion.  An  English  literary  man  tells  us, 
u  The  philosophy  of  the  past  said,  Know  thyself; 
the  philosophy  of  the  present  says,  Improve  thy-  \^f^ 
self."  In  sooth,  neither  of  these  will  make  much 
progress  without  the   other. 

Yet  the  powerful  instinct  of  self-love  needs  far 
less  encouragement  in  ethico-religious  teaching  than 
the  disposition  to  love  our  neighbor.  Accordingly, 
the  one  is  simply  implied  in  the  teachings  of  Jesus, 
the  other  is  repeatedly  and  strongly  urged.  The 
race  antagonisms  and  national  animosities  which  so 
abounded  in  the  world  that  Christianity  entered, 
which  caused  every  foreigner  to  be  instinctively  re- 
garded as  an  enemy,  led  the  Jewish  Kabbinical  in- 
structors to  quibble  with  the  command,  "Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  They  would  say, 
Certainly,  but  who  is  my  neighbor?  A  dog  of  a 
Gentile  is  not  my  neighbor.  An  abominable  Samar- 
itan is  not  my  neighbor.  And  so  there  arose  the 
fashion  of  making  an  addition  to  the  law,  "  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor,  and  hate  thine  enemy."  It 
is  easy  to  exclaim  against  the  scribes  and  lawyers 
for  such  a  gloss ;  but  it  ought  to  be  a  warning.  We 
are  all  in  danger  of  adding  to,  or  subtracting  from, 
or  somehow  modifying,  a  law  of  man  or  a  law  of 
God  that  interferes  with  our  interests,  passions  or 


54  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

prejudices.  We  read  that  a  certain  lawyer,  that  is 
a  professional  student  of  the  law  of  Moses,  under- 
took one  day  to  test  the  wisdom  of  Jesus  by  asking, 
u  Teacher,  what  shall  I  do  to  inherit  eternal  life  % 
And  he  said  unto  him,  What  is  written  in  the  law  % 
How  readest  thou?  And  he  answering  said,  Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and 
with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind;  and  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself."  Here  we  see  that  at  least 
some  of  the  Jewish  teachers  were  already  accus- 
tomed to  put  the  two  commandments  together.  And 
Jesus  said  unto  him,  "  Thou  hast  answered  right- 
this  do,  and  thou  shalt  live.  But  he,  desiring  to 
justify  himself,  said  unto  Jesus,  And  who  is  my 
neighbor  ? w  This  shows  the  process  above  men- 
tioned. He  wished  to  justify  himself  for  a  conscious 
lack  of  general  benevolence  by  restricting  the  defi- 
nition of  the  term  neighbor.  Having  perceived 
this,  we  see  the  point  of  the  Saviour's  reply  in  the 
parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan.  A  Jew  fell  among 
robbers,  who  left  him  half  dead.  Two  of  his  own 
people,  not  merely  private  citizens,  but  one  a  priest 
and  the  other  a  Levite,  successively  saw  his  hapless 
plight  and  kept  on  the  other  side  of  the  way.  Pres- 
ently he  was  relieved,  with  kindliest  care,  by  a 
Samaritan.  Let  us  be  thankful  that  with  all  our 
modern  bad  feeling  of  many  kinds,  we  find  it  hard 
to  realize  the  burning  hatred  which  existed  between 
the  Jews  and  the  Samaritans:  a  hatred  compounded 
of  race  antagonism,  oft-repeated  national  strife, 
utter  non-intercourse  socially  or  even  in  business, 
and  religious  bigotry  and  jealousy.  The  point  is 
then  that  a  neighbor,  in  the  sense  of  the  law,  is  even 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  55 

one  of  the  most  hostile  and  hated,  scorned  and 
loathed,  of  human  beings,  when  you  find  him  need- 
ing human  help.  Notice  in  this  case,  as  heretofore, 
how  strongly  the  Great  Teacher  presents  a  general 
truth  by  a  single  illustrative  example.  If  Jew  and 
Samaritan  were  to  be  neighbors,  in  the  sense  of  the 
law,  there  could  be  no  limit  within  the  bounds  of 
universal  humanity.  Wherever  we  see  need,  we 
see  a  neighbor.  And  the  priest  and  the  Levite, 
stepping  along  the  opposite  side  of  the  road,  are  a 
warning  to  all  religious  officials,  who  have  no  taste, 
or  fancy  they  have  no  time,  for  the  relief  of  suffer- 
ing humanity. 

We  must  observe  that  in  general  Jesus  did  not 
merely  enjoin  the  duty  of  caring  for  others.  The 
whole  tendency  of  his  teachings,  his  example,  the 
spirit  he  infuses,  has  always  been  to  awaken  a  burn- 
ing enthusiasm  for  the  relief,  the  improvement,  the 
increased  welfare  of  our  fellow-men.  Make  liberal 
concession,  far  more  liberal  than  any  known  facts 
might  indicate,  as  to  the  human  kindness  often 
manifested  before  Christ  came,  yet  every  one  must 
acknowledge  that  Christianity  has  in  this  respect 
given  a  new  meaning  to  such  words  as  benevolence 
and  humanity.  With  all  the  misapprehensions  and 
corruptions  of  Christian  teaching  which  have  pre- 
vailed, with  all  the  grievous  imperfections  and  in- 
consistencies so  widely  existing  among  professed 
Christians,  yet  the  story  of  Christian  benevolence, 
in  its  various  departments  and  throughout  the 
Christian  ages,  shines  among  the  fairest  and  most 
inspiring  pages  of  human  history.     And  how  far  its 


56  Jesus  of  Nazareth 

best  specimens  fall  short  of  the  original  author  and 
exemplar ! 

Many  have  considered  that  the  Saviour's  teach- 
ings as  to  forgiveness  were  impracticable;  that  to 
forgive  seven  times  a  day,  to  forgive  till  seventy 
times  seven,  to  forgive  those  who  trespass  against 
us,  or  else  we  cannot  hope  that  our  Heavenly 
Father  will  forgive  our  trespasses  against  him,  be- 
longs to  some  lofty  ideal  that  we  may  admire  like 
the  stars,  but  to  which  ordinary  humanity  can  never 
climb  up.  But  is  there  not  an  important  distinction 
here  between  forgiveness  and  the  love  of  enemies  1 
We  may  illustrate  again  by  the  example  of  God 
himself.  He  does  not  forgive  his  enemies  until 
they  repent  and  change  into  friends;  yet  he  loves 
his  enemies  who  have  not  repented,  and  sends  upon 
them  rain  and  sunshine,  the  common  blessings  of 
his  Providence.  So  we  ought  to  love  those  who. 
have  wronged  us,  and  be  glad  to  do  them  any  kind- 
ness which  would  not  promote  their  evil  designs 
against  us;  but  we  are  under  no  obligation,  in  fact 
we  have  no  right  to  forgive  them  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  term,  to  restore  them  to  our  confidence  and 
affection,  until  they  repent,  until  we  have  good  rea- 
son to  believe  that  they  will  henceforth  act  other- 
wise. If  this  be  the  correct  idea  of  Christian  for- 
giveness, it  is  not  impracticable,  and  we  should  not 
exempt  or  excuse  ourselves  from  performing  the 
duty  so  often  enjoined.  As  to  love  of  enemies,  with 
all  the  imperfection  of  our  actual  Christianity,  it 
has  wrought  a  great  change  in  the  views  and  feel- 
ings of  mankind.  Among  the  ancients  "  that  man 
considered  himself  fortunate  who  on  his  death-bed 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  57 

could  say,  in  reviewing  his  past  life,  that  no  one 
had  done  more  good  to  his  friends  or  more  mischief 
to  his  enemies.  This  was  the  celebrated  felicity  of 
Sulla  j  this  is  the  crown  of  Xenophon's  panegyric 
on  Cyrus  the  Younger."  The  author  of  u  Ecce 
Homo  n  adds,  "  When  therefore  people  deliberately 
consider  it  mean  to  forgive  extreme  injuries,  they 
are  really  setting  a  limit,  not  to  the  duty  of  forgive- 
ness, but  to  the  possibility  of  genuine  repentance. 
The  words  c  there  are  some  injuries  that  no  one 
ought  to  forgive/  mean  really  i  there  are  some  in- 
juries of  which  it  is  impossible  to  repent. J  n  And 
again,  "  The  forgiveness  of  injuries,  which  was  re- 
garded in  the  ancient  world  as  a  virtue  indeed,  but 
an  almost  impossible  one,  appears  to  the  moderns 
in  ordinary  cases  a  plain  duty.  .  .  And  so  a 
new  virtue  has  been  introduced  into  human  life." 
Many  in  Christian  countries  still  practice  unforgiv- 
ing hatred  and  even  ferocious  revenge,  but  few  de- 
fend it,  and  all  know  that  it  is  utterly  forbidden  by 
Christianity. 

A  kindred  subject  will  be  our  Lord's  teachings 
as  to  the  poor.  The  Jews  have  always  been  in  an 
eminent  degree  lovers  of  money,  and  gifted  in  ac- 
quiring it,  being  in  that,  as  in  most  respects,  one  of 
the  foremost  races  of  mankind.  They  interpreted 
the  Old  Testament  promises  of  providential  reward 
and  punishment  to  the  effect  that  if  a  man  was 
prosperous  and  rich  it  showed  him  to  be  an  uncom- 
monly good  man,  a  favorite  of  heaven  ;  and  if  he 
was  poor  and  suffering,  this  was  the  punishment  of 
his  uncommon  sinfulness.  So  the  friends  of  Job 
insisted  that  he  must  have  been  guilty  of  great  sins, 


58  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 

though  nobody  knew  what  they  were,  for  here  was 
the  manifest  penalty  and  proof  in  his  great  sufferings. 
If  a  Jew  had  passed  by  and  observed  the  scene 
described  in  the  parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Laz- 
arus, his  natural  thought  would  have  been,  yonder 
man  of  wealth  must  be  a  very  good  man,  and  this 
poor  wretch  at  the  gate  must  have  been  very 
wicked.  Now  the  author  of  the  parable  made  it 
teach  the  opposite  of  their  views  in  this  case.  He 
did  not  mean  that  all  rich  men  are  bad,  and  will 
one  day  lift  up  their  eyes,  being  in  torment,  nor 
that  all  poor  men  are  good,  but  he  gave  a  case  in 
point,  diametrically  opposed  to  Jewish  opinion. 
Yet  even  here  the  dying  beggar  was  carried  by 
angels  into  the  bosom  of  Abraham,  who  had  been  a 
Prince  of  the  East,  a  man  of  great  wealth.  Jesus 
rebuked  the  Jewish  error  as  to  riches  and  poverty, 
showed  himself  the  friend  of  the  pooj^  and  found* 
among  them  the  great  majority  of  his  followers. 
Yet  the  family  at  Bethany,  whom  he  especially 
loved,  were  manifestly  rich.  One  of  the  sisters 
had  a  box  of  perfumery,  which  was  declared  by  a 
man  interested  in  money-values,  named  Judas  Is- 
cariot,  to  be  worth  more  than  three  hundred  dena- 
ries.  Now  a  denary  was  the  common  price  of  a 
day's  labor,  and,  allowing  for  Sabbaths  and  feast- 
days,  this  box  of  perfumery  was  worth  more  than 
a  whole  year's  work  of  a  laboring  man.  Mary  of 
Bethany  could  not  have  possessed  it,  or  if  possess- 
ing by  gift  or  inheritance,  could  not  have  rightly 
used  it  in  an  unpractical  way,  had  they  not  been  a 
wealthy  family — which  also  accounts  for  the  fact 
that  "  many  of  the  Jews  "  went  out  from  Jerusalem 


His  Ethical  TeacMngs.  59 

to  the  suburban  village  to  comfort  the  sisters  when 
their  brother  died.  The  Saviour  had  the  previous 
day  commended  the  holy  enthusiasm  of  a  poor 
widow,  who  gave  more  than  all  the  rich,  gave  all 
she  had  to  live  on.  And  here  he  justifies  Mary  for 
using  this  costly  article  of  luxury  in  a  quite  un- 
practical expression  of  affection,  though  there  were 
thousands  of  poor  in  the  great  city  two  miles  away. 
The  occasion  was  extraordinary,  she  was  showing 
that  she  understood  better  than  the  Twelve  the 
Master's  intimations  of  his  approaching  death,  and 
that  the  recognition  of  it  did  not  weaken  her  faith 
or  her  love,  and  u  she  did  what  she  could  "  to  cheer 
him  as  the  dark  shadows  gathered.  But  though 
the  incident  was  extraordinary  in  its  circumstances, 
it  certainly  proves  that  wealthy  people  may  some- 
times lawfully  express  affection  to  God  or  man  by 
costly  gifts,  though  there  be  many  all  around  who 
are  poor  and  needy. 

The  words  of  Jesus  to  the  young  ruler,  "  Sell  all 
thou  hast  and  give  to  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have 
treasure  in  heaven ;  and  come,  follow  me,"  are  of- 
ten spoken  of  as  if  he  had  enjoined  this  upon  all 
who  propose  to  follow  him.  Yet  there  is  no  record 
of  his  laying  such  requirement  upon  any  one  else, 
except  that  Matthew  the  publican  and  the  two  sons 
of  Zebedee  left  their  business  to  follow  him  as  per- 
manently attached  disciples.  The  "  one  thing " 
lacked  by  the  young  ruler  was  that  he  should  not 
only  care  much  for  eternal  life,  but  care  more  for  it 
than  all  things  else.  The  test  was,  whether  he 
would  sacrifice  what  he  valued  most  in  this  world, 
out  of  supreme  devotion  to  Jesus,     That  which  be 


60  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

valued  most  was  his  vast  wealth,  and  this  test  he 
could  not  stand.  The  test  for  another  man  would 
be  whether  out  of  devotion  to  Jesus  he  could  aban- 
don sinful  pleasures,  or  relinquish  worldly  ambitions. 
The  principle  involved  is  that  the  service  of  God 
must  be  supreme.  In  a  certain  sense,  u  religion 
must  be  everything,  or  it  is  nothing."  One  who 
retains  or  acquires  wealth,  one  who  pursues  ambi- 
tion or  indulges  in  pleasures,  must  subordinate  all  to 
his  Christian  discipleship,  or  he  is  no  disciple. 

It  was  to  Jewish  hearers  an  almost  unequalled 
paradox  to  say,  "  How  hard  is  it  for  a  rich  man  to 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  It  is  easier  for 
a  camel  to  pass  through  the  eye  of  a  needle." 
Various  and  strange  attempts  have  been  made  to 
explain  away  this  comparison.  Yet  it  is  an 
obvious  hyperbole — the  largest  familiar  animal 
passing  through  the  smallest  familiar  orifice,  rep- 
resenting impossibility.  The  Talmud  has  a  similar 
saying,  only  substituting  the  elephant,  a  still  larger 
animal.  The  disciples  understood  Jesus  as  mean- 
ing an  impossibility,  for  they  replied,  "  Who  then 
can  be  saved  ?  "  If  the  rich  cannot,  who  can  be  ? 
And  Jesus  answered,  u  With  men  it  is  impossible  ; 
but  with  God. all  things  are  possible."  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  begins  with 
a  series  of  sayings  quite  the  reverse  of  Jewish 
opinion.  This  opinion  was,  Happy  the  rich,  the 
well-fed,  the  merry,  those  who  taste  the  sweetness 
of  revenge.  Jesus  says,  Happy  the  poor,  the  hun- 
gry, the  mourners,  the  meek  and  merciful,  the  peace- 
makersc  Why  should  the  poor  be  called  happy  ? 
Because  they  were  more  likely  to  accept  the  good 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  61 

news  of  the  Messianic  reign,  and  thu3  to  enjoy  its 
high  spiritual  blessing ;  because  the  poor  in  posses- 
sions were  more  likely  to  become  the  poor  in  spirit. 
This  reconciles  for  us  the  phrase  in  Luke,  u  Happy 
are  ye  poor,"  with  that  in  Matthew,  "  Happy  are  the 
poor  in  spirit."  In  like  manner  the  Saviour  more 
than  once  set  it  forth  as  a  sign  of  his  Messiahship,  a 
sign  predicted  by  Isaiah,  "  To  the  poor  the  gospel  is 
preached.''  It  requires  an  almost  impossible  effort 
of  historical  imagination  to  appreciate  the  change 
which  Christianity  has  wrought  in  the  feelings  of 
mankind  with  regard  to  the  poor.  Still,  alas  ! 
even  in  Christian  countries,  they  are  often  despised 
and  neglected  and  wronged.  But  this  much  at 
least  is  true,  that  all  men  know  it  ought  to  be 
Otherwise,  and  that  very  many  strive,  in  various 
and  helpful  ways,  to  have  it  otherwise.  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  has  been  the  best  friend  the  poor  have 
ever  had  in  human  history  ;  and  his  faithful  and 
wise  followers  will  try  in  this  also  to  be  like  him. 
Yet  we  have  seen  that  he  was  no  enemy  of  wealth, 
that  he  had  special  friends  and  devoted  followers 
who  were  wealthy ;  and  there  is  nothing  in  his 
teachings  to  encourage  the  notion  that  equality  in 
human  possessions  is  desirable  or  possible. 

In  this  connection  it  may  be  well  to  make  a  slight 
digression,  and  notice  a  very  common  and  very 
grave  misunderstanding  as  to  the  generosity  of  the 
Saviour's  followers  in  Jerusalem  during  the  years 
that  immediately  succeeded  his  departure.  The 
phrase  is  used  in  Acts,  u  they  had  all  things  com- 
mon n  ;  and  it  is  stated  that  even  the  holders  of 
real  estate  would  sell  it  and  bring  the    money  to 


62  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

the  Apostles  for  the  support  of  the  brethren. 
Hence  the  idea  has  grown  widely  current  that 
these  Christians  at  Jerusalem  were  really  Com- 
munists, that  every  one  who  joined  them  at  once 
gave  up  his  entire  possessions  to  a  common  fund, 
and  there  was  no  longer  any  private  ownership  j 
and  from  this  supposed  fact  various  inferences  have 
been  drawn  by  friend  and  foe.  But  it  is  not  a  fact. 
It  can  be  proven  from  the  record  that  they  were 
not  Communists.  When  Ananias  sold  a  piece  of 
land,  and  brought  a  part  of  the  proceeds  to  the 
Apostles,  making  the  impression  that  he  had 
brought  all,  as  others  were  doing,  Peter  said  to  him, 
"  While  it  remained,  did  it  not  remain  thine  own  ? 
and  after  it  was  sold,  was  it  not  in  thy  power  ?  n 
His  sin  was  not  in  withholding  a  part,  but  in  lying 
to  inspired  men,  lying  against  God.  Now  this 
language  of  Peter  is  absolutely  incompatible  with* 
the  idea  that  every  Christian  at  once  gave  up  all 
his  property  to  a  common  fund.  The  Apostle 
declares  that  the  property  was  his  own  while  it  re- 
mained unsold ;  and  that  after  it  was  sold,  the 
money  was  in  his  own  power.  He  was  under  no 
necessity  of  selling,  or  of  turning  over  the  proceeds. 
Think  of  it,  and  this  clearly  shows  that  no  real 
Communism  prevailed  among  them.  What  then  is 
meant  by  the  phrase,  u  they  had  all  things  com- 
mon n  ?  It  means  that  they  held  all  their  property 
as  for  the  common  benefit.  Listen  :  "  and  not  one 
of  them  said  that  aught  of  the  things  which  he 
possessed  was  his  own  ;  but  they  had  all  things 
common."  No  one  said  that  any  part  of  his  prop- 
erty was  his  own  j  it  was  his  own,  but  he  did  not 


His  Ethical  Teachings.  63 

so  speak  of  it ;  he  regarded  and  treated  his  prop- 
erty as  held  for  the  benefit  of  his  brethren.  A 
reader  of  the  Greek  will  notice  that  here  and 
throughout  the  following  passage  every  verb  is  in 
the  imperfect  tense,  showing  what  happened  from 
time  to  time,  as  the  brethren  saw  need  and  felt 
moved  :  "  as  many  as  were  possessors  of  lands  or 
•  houses  sold  them,  and  brought  the  prices  of  the 
things  that  were  sold,  and  laid  them  at  the  Apostles' 
feet ;  and  distribution  was  made  unto  each,  ac- 
cording as  any  one  had  need."  Every  verb  is 
in  the  imperfect  tense.  ( Acts  4 :  32-35 ;  like- 
wise in  2  :  43-47.)  One  Christian  this  month,  and 
another  the  next  month,  would  bring  money,  even 
selling  property  for  the  purpose ;  and  this  went  on 
during  the  several  years  embraced  in  the  first 
six  chapters  of  Acts.  Thus  you  see  that  this  was 
not  at  all  a  case  of  Communism.  It  was  a  case 
of  extraordinary  generosity,  called  for  by  extraor- 
dinary needs.  Many  of  these  first  believers  had 
come  up  to  the  great  Pentecost,  with  only  money 
enough  for  a  short  visit  and  a  return,  and  here  they 
were  remaining  for  months  and  years ;  others  had 
been  fishermen  on  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  and  at  Jerusa- 
lem had  no  means  of  livelihood ;  others  were  poor 
Jews  at  Jerusalem,  accustomed  to  receive  help  from 
the  contributions  of  wealthy  Jews  in  foreign  coun- 
tries, and  cut  off  from  this  as  soon  as  they  became 
Christians.  Rejoicing  together  in  their  new  faith 
and  hope  and  love,  those  of  them  who  had  property 
gladly  contributed,  as  they  saw  occasion,  for  the 
support  of  their  brethren.  All  this  ceased  of  course 
when  the  disciples  were  scattered  in  every  direction 


64  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

by  the  persecution  that  arose  in  connection  with 
Stephen.  And  it  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that 
this  magnificent  example  of  Christian  generosity 
should  be  popularly  mistaken  for  an  attempt  at 
Communism,  and  even  sometimes  represented  as 
turning  out  to  be  impracticable,  and  thereby  show- 
ing itself  to  be  unwise. 

The  fact  that  in  this  and  various  other  cases  the* 
ethical  teachings  of  Christianity  have  been  widely 
misunderstood,  must  not  prevent  us  from  recogniz- 
ing and  endeavoring  fully  to  appreciate  how  much 
the  Saviour  really  taught  that  was  new  to  the 
world,  and  among  the  greatest  blessings  ever 
brought  to  mankind.  When  he  said  u  give  to  him 
that  asketh,"  it  was  (as  we  have  seen)  not  a  mere 
rule,  requiring  or  authorizing  us  to  scatter  alms 
with  blind  negligence,  since  God,  who  is  held 
forth  as  our  example,  gives  to  those  who  ask  hiin, 
but  gives  wisely  j  and  yet  it  is  a  precept  that 
stirs  every  true  Christian  heart  to  benevolence. 
Whether  we  shall  give  to  needy  individuals  upon 
casual  application,  or  shall  in  general  prefer  to  give 
through  carefully  organized  effort,  is  a  question  of 
expediency  and  practical  wisdom  ;  but  in  some  way? 
yea,  in  all  ways  that  are  not  palpably  unwise,  we 
must  give.  And  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  whole 
spirit  of  Christianity  that  we  should  not  merely 
relieve  human  suffering,  but  that  we  should  strive 
to  prevent  it.  The  principles  which  Jesus  taught 
will  be  found  to  apply  with  the  most  flexible 
adaptation  to  whatever  may  be  required  and  justi- 
fied by  our  growing  knowledge  of  sanitary  and 
social  conditions, 


His  Ethical  Teachings,  65 

I  should  be  very  glad,  if  we  had  time,  to  dwell 
on  many  details  of  the  Saviour's  ethical  instruction. 
Especially  should  I  like  to  show — what  we  all 
know  in  a  general  way — how  he  has  put  unspeak- 
able honor  upon  the  lowlier  and  more  passive  vir- 
tues, which  the  pride  of  human  strength  is  so  apt 
to  neglect  or  even  to  despise.  But  it  is  impossible 
now  to  attempt  any  detailed  exhibition  of  his  moral 
teachings.  I  know  of  no  one  who  questions  that  as 
a  whole  they  are  greatly  superior  to  those  of  any 
other  teacher,  or  of  all  other  teachers  combined. 
The  only  drawback  with  some  minds  has  been  tho 
existence  of  certain  sayings  supposed  to  be  impracti- 
cable, and  these  I  have  tried  to  show  have  been  sim- 
ply misunderstood.  The  only  ethical  teachings  now 
compared  by  any  one  with  those  of  Jesus  are  the 
ethics  found  in  the  Buddhist  writings.  Let  us  glad- 
ly recognize  all  in  these  that  is  true  and  wholesome, 
and  the  great  good  they  have  done  on  a  wide  scale 
in  the  Asiatic  world,  as  supplanting  ideas  that 
formerly  prevailed  among  many  races.  The  recent 
fashion  of  favorably  comparing  Buddhism  with 
Christianity  has  been  thought  by  some  to  find 
countenance  in  Sir  Edwin  Arnold's  poem,  "  The 
Light  of  Asia."  It  may  have  been  justifiable  in  a 
poem  that  he  should  borrow  Christian  terms,  and 
add  no  small  tinge  of  Christian  sentiments,  in  order 
to  make  pleasing  poetry  for  Christian  readers;  the 
trouble  is  that  many  have  failed  to  distinguish  in 
this  case  between  a  poem  and  a  history.  As  I 
heartily  admire  many  parts  of  u  The  Light  of  Asia,'* 
I  am  glad  to  quote  words  taken  down  from  the  au- 
thor's  lips  during  his   recent   voyage   across   the 


66  Jesus  of  Nazareth 

Pacific  by  a  man  whom  I  personally  know  to  be  of 
the  highest  character  and  intelligence.  Sir  Edwin 
said  to  Dr.  Ashmore,  u  I  have  been  criticised  for 
an  implied  comparison  between  Buddhism  and 
Christianity  in  regard  to  doctrines  derived  from 
them  and  principles  contained  in  them  respectively. 
No  such  object  was  in  mind.  For  me  Christianity 
rightly  viewed  is  the  crowned  queen  of  religions,  im- 
mensely superior  to  every  other,  and  though  I  am 
so  great  an  admirer  of  much  that  is  great  in  Hindu 
philosophy  and  religion,  I  would  not  give  one  verse 
of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  away  for  twenty  epic 
poems  like  the  Mahabharata,  nor  exchange  the 
golden  ride  for  twenty  new  Upanishads." 

It  may  be  mentioned  in  conclusion  that  some 
propose  to  exalt  the  moral  teachings  of  Jesus  by 
saying  that  for  them  no  further  religion  is  necessary. 
They  will  live  by  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  alone. 
But  he  who  spoke  that  great  and  inspiring  discourse 
gave  many  other  teachings,  ethical  and  spiritual. 
Were  they  superfluous?  Shall  we  be  really  honor- 
ing him,  or  acting  wisely  and  safely  for  ourselves, 
if  we  presume  to  select  one  discourse  of  his  and 
treat  all  the  rest  of  his  teaching  and  his  work  as 
unnecessary  and  useless? 

Besides,  who  does  really  nve  up  to  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount?  Who  can  afford  to  slight  the  relig- 
ion of  Jesus,  upon  the  assumption  of  fully  conform- 
ing to  his  ethical  instructions?  To  end  as  we  began. 
He  gave  ethical  and  religious  teachings  together — 
he  stands  as  not  merely  a  teacher,  but  a  Saviour. 
Others  have  taught  well  and  helpfully,  though   not 


Bis  Ethical  Teachings.  67 

in  a  way  comparable  to  his  teaching,  as  to  how  we 
ought  to  live  j  he  alone  can  also  give  the  spiritual 
help  we  need  in  order  actually  to  live  as  his  teach- 
ings require. 


III. 

®b  Supernatural  Morks  of  Jfcsus. 


THE   SUPERNATURAL   WORKS   OF   JESUS. 


PROFESSOR  Huxley,  in  his  "Life  of  David 
Hume  "  and  in  sonic  recent  magazine  articles, 
admits  that  Hume's  once  celebrated  position  in  regard 
to  miracles  cannot  be  maintained.  Hume  held  that 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  no  amount  of  testimony 
can  establish  a  miraculous  event.  Huxley  prefers 
to  say  that  alleged  miraculous  events  require 
"  evidence  of  a  cogency  proportionate  to  their 
departure  from  probability."  To  this,  as  a  general 
principle,  we  should  all  readily  agree.  The  testi- 
mony for  a  miracle  must  be  exceedingly  strong  and 
clear.  Tell  me  that  a  man  who  died  in  Washington 
last  week  has  come  to  life,  and  if  the  matter 
seemed  worthy  of  attention  I  should  scrutinize  the 
evidence  narrowly  and  patiently,  and  engage 
others  to  do  likewise  with  the  most  earnest  and 
unwearied  effort,  before  I  could  think  of  admitting 
that  the  alleged  occurrence  is  real. 

But  in  the  case  of  Christ's  miracles  this  need  of 
immensely  strong  evidence  is  in  a  great  degree 
offset  by  the  fact  that  the  miracles  stand  in 
immediate  and  inseparable  connection  with  his 
perfect  character  and  his  peerless  teachings.  We 
have   tried   on   former    occasions    to    attain     some 

71 


7l  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

conception  of  the  Saviour's  personal  character,  and 
of  his  exalted  ethical  instruction.  Now  in  the 
records  these  are  inextricably  interwoven  with  his 
supernatural  works.  Tear  out  all  the  supernatural 
elements  from  the  gospels,  and  the  remainder  will 
be  no  history  at  all,  but  a  mass  of  shattered  and 
broken  matters  worse  than  the  ruins  of  so  many 
noble  buildings  which  the  other  day  I  left  shapely 
and  useful  in  the  city  where  I  dwell.  Jesus  him- 
self speaks  of  his  miracles  as  real.  In  several  in- 
stances he  promises  beforehand,  as  in  regard  to 
Lazarus,  and  especially  in  regard  to  his  own 
resurrection.  In  other  cases  he  points  back  to  his 
past  miraculous  work.  Take  the  gospels  as  they 
stand,  in  all  their  beauty  and  simplicity,  their 
pathos  and  power,  and  if  Jesus  of  Nazareth  did  not 
perform  supernatural  works,  he  many  times  spoke 
falsely.  The  very  suggestion  is  painful,  even  to 
many  who  altogether  deny  the  supernatural.  But 
whatever  efforts  may  be  made  to  evade  it,  the 
alternative  faces  us  squarely.  Either  he  who 
spake  as  never  man  spake,  and  in  whose  character 
no  criticism  can  discern  a  fault,  who  shines  as 
clear  and  sweet  as  the  very  morning  star  of  human- 
ity, either  he  did  perform  supernatural  works  or  he 
spoke  falsely.  It  might  be  possible  that  in  some 
cases  bystanders  should  be  mistaken  ;  but  he  him- 
self could  not  be  mistaken.  Thus  then  there  is  a 
highly  important  difference  between  the  common 
run  of  alleged  miracles,  ancient  or  modern,  and 
the  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ.  And  I  am  not  rea- 
soning in  a  circle — not  proving  the  person  by  the 
miracles  and  the  miracles  by  the   person  j  but  they 


His  Supernatural  Works.  73 

stand  like  the  opposite  parts  of  an  arch,  upholding 
each  other,  and  both  together  upholding  all  that 
rests  upon  them,  even  the  divinity  of  Christ's  mis- 
sion, and  the  truth  of  all  his   personal  claims. 

Moreover,  when  we  •  survey  the  supernatural 
works  ascribed  in  the  New  Testament  to  Jesus 
Christ,  we  find  them  to  differ  very  widely  as  to 
their  intrinsic  character  from  many  alleged  mira- 
cles. They  are  all  beneficent,  ministering  to 
human  need,  relieving  human  distress.  "  He  went 
about  doing  men  good."  The  one  or  two  cases  in 
which  his  miracles  seemed  not  beneficent  are  of  the 
very  slightest  importance  and  could  be  easily  ac- 
counted for.  Again,  the  miraculous  healing  of  dis- 
eases on  the  part  of  Jesus  cannot  be  explained  by 
the  faith  of  those  concerned.  He  usually  required 
faith  in  the  applicants,  and  probably  a  good  many 
persons  at  the  present  time  have  an  uneasy  feeling 
that  this  resembles  what  is  now  popularly  called 
faith-cure,  and  that  perhaps  it  might  be  explained 
by  the  mere  natural  influence  of  awakened  expecta- 
tion and  confidence.  But  the  Saviour  healed  in 
various  instances  where  the  sufferer  was  at  a  dis- 
tance, and  only  the  friends  making  the  application 
had  faith.  He  raised  the  widow's  son  at  Nain 
without  any  request  or  expectation.  He  rose  him- 
self from  the  dead  when  his  followers  were  not  at 
all  expecting  it.  He  wrought  miracles  upon  inani- 
mate nature,  the  winds  and  the  waters,  and  the 
food  which  he  multiplied.  So  we  cannot  explain 
the  healings  by  the  mere  natural  effect  of  faith. 
Why  then,  it  may  be  asked,  did  he  so  generally 
condition  his  miraculous  healings  upon  faith?     The 


74  Jesus  r>f  Nazareth. 

answer  seems  to  bo,  that  he  was  always  wishing  to 
make  bodily  healing  the  occasion  of  spiritual  bene- 
fit,  and   for  this    it   was    indispensable    that    they 
should  have  faith  in  him  and  his   teachings.     We 
can  also  see  that  his  miracles  were   dignified,  and 
worthy  to  be  associated  with  a  revelation  from  God. 
These  superhuman  events  were  the  sign-manual  of 
the  Most  High,  given  to  authenticate  messages  sent 
forth  from  the  headquarters  of  the  universe.     There 
is  an  unspeakable  difference  between  alleged  miracles 
sometimes  trivial  in  themselves,  and  having  no  con- 
nection with  divine  revelation,  and  the  miracles  of 
Jesus  Christ.     To  confound  them  as  some  objectors 
do,  to  place  them  all  on  the  same  footing,  is  to  com- 
mit a  profound  and  far-reaching  error.     The  Saviour 
gave  no  encouragement  to  those  who  would  value 
miracles  for  their  own  sake.     He*  never  wrought  a 
miracle  when   it  was   demanded.     Rebukingly    he 
said,  u  Except  ye  see  signs  and  wonders,  ye  will  not 
believe."     What  he  offered  them   was  high  spirit- 
ual and  moral  instruction,  to  be   prized  on  its  own 
merits,  and  at  the  same  time  given  by  one  having  a 
divine  mission,  one  of  whom  Nicodemus   the   San- 
hedrist   said,  for  himself  and   others,    "  We   know 
that  thou  hast   come   from  God  as  a  teacher,  for  no 
man  can  do  these   signs  which   thou  doest,  except 
God  be  with  him."     He  did  not  wish  to  be   heeded 
simply  because  of  the  supernatural  works.     Yet.  lie 
distinctly  and  repeatedly   appealed  to  these  as  at- 
testation      ■•  The  works   that  I  do  in   my   Father's 
name,  they   bear  witness   of  me."     u  But   that  ye 
may  know  that  the  Son  of  man  hath  power  on  earth 
to  forgive  sins — he   said  to  the  paralytic,  Aris<>  and 


His  Supernatural  Works,  75 

walk."  And  so  he  bade  John's  messengers  carry 
back  word  that  they  found  him  healing  the  blind, 
raising  the  dead,  and  preaching  good  news  to  the 
poor.  Thus  we  see  that  he  gave  no  warrant  for 
over- valuation  of  the  miraculous,  nor  yet  for  under- 
valuing and  neglecting  it. 

But  how  about  the  evidence  that  Jesus  of  Naz- 
areth really  did  perform  supernatural  works  ?  This 
is  a  matter  upon  which  great  stress  is  naturally 
laid  by  thoughtful  inquirers,  and  which  deserves 
the  most  earnest  consideration. 

Attempts  are  made  in  various  ways  to  cut  the 
matter  short.  Some  claim  that  theological  writers 
and  all  defenders  of  orthodox  Christianity  are  con- 
strained by  hopeless  prejudice,  or  by  the  necessities 
of  their  intellectual  or  their  temporal  position,  to 
take  the  views  they  hold,  and  that  only  skeptical 
or  agnostic  writers  are  unprejudiced  seekers  after 
truth.  Well,  we  human  beings  are  all  subject  to 
prejudice,  all  liable  to  be  constrained  by  the  logical 
limitations  of  any  undertaking  whatsoever.  They 
who  wish  to  judge  wisely  must  recognize  this  as  a 
difficulty  attending  all  human  investigation.  I  do 
not  at  all  deny  that  the  danger  exists  for  those  who 
advocate  the  truth  of  Christianity  as  a  supernatural 
revelation  ;  but  how  strange  it  is  for  men  who  oppose 
Christianity  to  imagine  themselves  exempt  from 
this  danger.  These  men  are  compelled  to  explain 
away  the  Christian  evidences,  or  else  they  must  ad- 
mit that  Christianity  is  true  j  and  they  will  feel 
this  admission  to  be  important  just  in  proportion  as 
they  are  men  of  earnest  soul.  For  here  Christian- 
ity is,  in  the  world — often  grievously  corrupted,  to 


76  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

be  sure,  taken  by  Constantine  and  others  as  a  plank 
in  their  political  platform,  often  held  as  the  mere 
maid-servant  of  government,  sometimes  honey- 
combed with  errors,  encompassed  with  hypocrisies, 
and  yet  what  a  power  through  all  the  centuries ; 
how  inseparably  and  influentially  associated  with 
the  best  civilization  !  Now  the  Christ  of  the  gos- 
pels accounts  for  Christianity.  It  rests  its  strong- 
est claim  upon  his  resurrection.  And  the  evidence 
of  his  resurrection  is  immediately  associated  with 
his  personal  character  and  his  noble  teachings. 
The  objectors,  just  in  proportion  as  they  have 
moral  earnestness,  are  absolutely  compelled  to  in- 
validate the  evidence.  They  are  not  at  all  im- 
partial nor  disinterested.  It  is  just  as  necessary 
for  their  intellectual  and  moral  position  to  assail  the 
evidences  of  Christianity  as  for  others  to  maintain 
them. 

"  Well  then,"  some  one  might  be  tempted  to  say, 
u  since  both  sides  are  liable  to  be  prejudiced  and 
warped  in  judgment,  we  cannot  hope  to  reach  any 
satisfactory  conclusion  on  the  questions  involved. ,; 
That  view  of  the  matter,  if  consistently  carried  out, 
would  lead  us  to  doubt  everything,  since  human  in- 
firmity may  attach,  in  some  way  or  other,  to  every 
exercise  of  the  human  faculties.  But  we  cannot 
doubt  everything.  Some  things  must  be  true.  In 
other  directions  we  do  rely  on  our  faculties ;  why  so 
ready  just  here  to  decry  them  ?  We  must  aU 
earnestly  endeavor,  whichsoever  side  we  assume  with 
regard  to  any  great  question,  to  escape  the  dominion 
of  prejudice  and  to  see  things  as  they  arc.  And  we 
must   remember  that  it  is  the  cheapest  and  most 


His  Supernatural  Works.  77 

facile,  and  perhaps  the  most  blinding  of  all  preju- 
dices, to  take  for  granted  that  other  men  are  preju- 
diced, and  we  alone  are  exempt. 

Moreover,  everybody  knows  that  a  skilful  lawyer, 
who  has  a  case  to  make  out,  can  of  course  give 
some  plausibility  to  his  contention,  and  cast  some 
suspicion  upon  opposing  testimony  and  argument. 
One  who  is  very  ingenious  may  temporarily  per- 
plex many  of  his  hearers  in  regard  to  a  sufficiently 
clear  case.  Now  the  methods  which  some  skeptical 
writers  employ  in  casting  a  cloud  of  doubt  about  the 
evidences  as  to  the  character,  teachings  and  super- 
natural works  of  Jesus,  could  be  made  just  as  effect- 
ive in  regard  to  many  of  the  best  known  persons 
and  events  of  history.  This  has  been  illustrated 
many  times,  notably  by  Archbishop  Whately  in  his 
taking  brochure,  "Historic  Doubts  Concerning  Na- 
poleon Bonaparte."  I  knew  of  a  University  student 
who  read  this  work,  and  said  with  every  appearance 
of  sincerity  that  he  very  much  questioned  whether 
such  a  man  as  Napoleon  Bonaparte  ever  lived.  An 
interesting  example  is  also  given  by  Henry  Eogers 
in  a  chapter  of  his  work  entitled  "  The  Eclipse  of 
Faith." 

Another  short  method  of  ending  the  question  as- 
serts that  "nothing  is  certain  but  what  is  demon- 
strated or  demonstrable. "  Then  a  man  can  never 
be  certain  that  his  wife  loves  him,  or  that  his  de- 
parted mother  did.  Then  a  man  cannot  be  certain 
as  to  any  historical  occurrence,  or  any  current 
events  that  lie  beyond  his  own  observation,  and 
even  our  senses  are  quite  as  apt  to  err  as  our  men- 
tal faculties.     Then  a  man  cannot  be  certain  that 


78  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

anything  is  right,  or  any  other  thing  is  wrong.    Hu- 
man life  rests  mainly  upon  practical  certainties,  ac- 
companied  by  other  matters  of  reasonable  probabiU ' 
ity,   and   not    exclusively    or    chiefly  upon   things 
demonstrated  or  demonstrable.* 

Another  class  of  objectors  end  the  matter  by  saying 
that  such  miracles  are  impossible,  if  not  theoretically 
impossible,  yet  practically  and  inevitably  incredible. 
They  simply  cannot  believe  in  any  such  interrup- 
tion as  they  think  a  miracle  involves  in  the  uniform 
action  of  physical  forces  according  to  those  beauti- 
ful fixed  laws,  about  which  we  have  been  learning 
so  much  and  which  we  ought  all  not  only  to  admire 
with  delight,  but  to  respect  and  obey.  But  if 
this  is  a  reason  for  summarily  rejecting  the  possibiU 
ity  of  miracles,  that  it  involves  such  a  change  in  the 
uniformity  of  natural  action,  one  thing  will  certainly 
follow  :     The    person   who  thus  maintains    will  be 

*It  frequently  happens  that  a  young  man  just  grown  is 
rather  skeptical  about  the  truth  of  Christianity,  hut  after 
some  years  these  doubts  have  disappeared,  without  any 
obvious  cause.  The  explanation  is  commonly  this.  When 
his  mind  first  expanded  to  comprehend  things,  and  to  dis- 
criminate sharply,  he  craved  absolute  certitude  about  every- 
thing. But  entering  the  various  practical  relations  and  pur- 
suits of  life,  he  becomes  accustomed  to  decide  important 
questions  of  duty  and  interest  upon  a  mere  practical  centainty, 
or  even  upon  fairly  probable  grounds,  and  thus  he  learns  by 
degrees  in  the  school  of  life  a  lessen  which  Butler's  "  Analogy  " 
has  enabled  some  other  young  men  to  anticipate,  that  in 
many  of  our  most  important  affairs  ll  probability  is  the  law 
of  life."  What  a  pity  when  a  young  man  takes  such  early 
questionings  as  an  excuse  for  falling  into  habits  of  immorality, 
or  assumes  a  position  of  antagonism  to  Christianity,  or  habit- 
ually neglects  its  instructions  and  influences,  so  as  to  become 
disqualified  for  profiting  by  these  important  lessons  of  life's 
experience, 


His  Supernatural  Works.  79 

utterly  inconsistent  if  he  does  not  also  hold  that 
creation  is  an  impossible  conception.  If  one  can- 
not believe  that  a  superior  power  has  ever  caused 
physical  forces  to  act  otherwise  than  according  to 
the  observed  uniformity,  then  how  can  he  believe  that 
these  ever  went  through  the  unspeakable  change 
of  passing  out  of  non-existence  into  existence  ?  Say 
that  miracles  are  essentially  incredible,  and  how 
can  you  consistently  be  a  Theist  ?  Surely  the 
Creator  of  these  grand  physical  forces,  who  caused 
them  to  work  according  to  these  beautiful  laws, 
surely  he  can  interpose  his  higher  force  to  control 
them  into  some  unwonted  action,  without  violating 
their  essential  nature  or  disturbing  the  harmony  of 
the  universe  he  created.  Some,  alas  !  accept  the 
alternative,  and  say  that  they  cannot  believe  in  crea- 
tion or  a  Creator.  And  the  popular  fashion  at  present 
is  to  call  themselves  Agnostics.  They  do  not  care 
to  maintain  that  there  is  no  God,  and  no  future  life 
for  mankind;  they  simply  do  not  know.  Now  and 
then  one  says  this  seriously  and  therefore  of  neces- 
sity sadly,  and  such  persons  deserve  respect  and 
consideration.  But  others  seem  to  say  it  with  easy 
indifference  or  even  with  arrogance.  They  do  not 
know,  nor  care.  Or  they  do  not  know,  and  feel 
proud  of  the  recognized  ignorance,  and  liken  them- 
selves to  Socrates.  Some  people  might  remember 
our  political  Agnostics,  the  u  Know-Nothings n  of 
35  years  ago,  and  how  short  a  time  that  "  fad n 
lasted.  Mr.  Spurgeon  remarks  that  this  boasted 
name  Agnostic  means  the  same  thing  as  ignoramus. 
But  it  is  more  common  at  the  present  day  to  im- 
peach the  contemporary  testimony  to  the  supernat- 


80  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

ural  works  of  Jesus  on  the  ground  that  the  wiU 
nesses  were  predisposed  to  believe  in  miracles. 
Suppose  we  state  this  baldly.  If  men  are  willing 
to  believe  in  miracles,  their  testimony  as  to  the 
occurrence  of  miracles  must  be  rejected  ;  only  men 
who  begin  by  rejecting  miracles  can  be  believed  on 
that  subject.  John  Stuart  Mill  says  that  the  com- 
monest of  all  fallacies  is  begging  the  question.  I 
know  of  course  that  the  unbelieving  critic  would  wish 
to  state  the  matter  otherwise.  lie  would  say,  If 
men  strongly  incline  to  believe  in  miracles  their 
testimony  on  that  subject  must  be  taken  with 
reserve  and  discount,  though  they  be  quite  credible 
on  other  subjects.  Very  well,  only  remember  that 
the  witnesses  to  the  Christian  miracles  have  also 
presented  us  the  character  of  Christ  and  his  ethical 
teachings.  But  on  the  other  hand,  if  men  instan- 
taneously reject  a  miracle  whenever  presented  to 
their  mind,  then  their  Judgment  on  that  question  is 
subject  to  a  like  discount.  Those  who  hold  that 
miracles  are  practically  impossible,  are  they  good 
judges  of  the  testimony  to  a  miracle  ?  Those  who 
follow  Matthew  Arnold  in  one  of  his  favorite  neat 
phrases,  and  oracularly  say  that  u  miracles  simply 
do  not  happen/'  are  they  good  judges  ?  Those  who 
admit  that  the  question  of  miracles  is  a  question  of 
evidence,  but  when  asked  to  consider  the  evidence 
for  any  particular  miracle,  obviously  reject  the 
miracle  in  advance,  and  investigate  the  evidence 
with  a  manifest  and  exclusive  view  to  weaken  it,  are 
they  good  judges  ? 

There  are  of  course  various  kinds  of  testimony, 
and  each  requires  a  certain  training,  that  we  may 


His  Supernatural  Works.  81 

with  critical  care  and  sound  judgment  determine 
its  value.  The  great  facts  and  principles  of  modern 
astronomy  have  had  to  work  their  way  into  general 
reception  through  immense  opposition,  not  only 
from  the  ignorant  masses  of  mankind,  who  would 
not  believe  what  seemed  to  contradict  their  senses, 
but  from  many  cultivated  men,  whose  mental  train- 
ing had  been  exclusively  on  other  sides,  so  that 
most  of  them  could  not  appreciate  the  testimony  of 
astronomical  experts,  and  some  gravely  doubted 
whether  the  Integral  Calculus  was  not  a  mere  work 
of  imagination,  and  Celestial  Mechanics  a  figment 
of  fancy.  In  like  manner,  a  lack  of  qualification  to 
appreciate  the  evidence  has  caused  many  to  be 
very  slow  in  accepting  the  best  attested  results  of 
geology,  or  of  biology,  or  of  sociology.  But  the 
same  thing  is  true  of  some  admirable  adepts  in 
physical  observation,  some  eminent  specialists  in 
one  department  or  another  of  physical  science,  when 
called  to  judge  of  historical  evidence.  A  long-con- 
tinued exclusive  mental  devotion  to  facts  and 
methods  of  quite  a  different  kind  has  made  it  as 
difficult  for  them  to  estimate  rightly  the  evidence  of 
some  great  historical  event  as  the  classes  of  persons 
previously  described  have  found  it  to  judge  rightly 
concerning  the  results  of  physical  science.  The  fact 
is,  that  knowledge  has  become  so  widely  developed, 
and  specialized  into  so  many  distinct  lines  of  inves- 
tigation, and  each  of  these  pushed  into  such  a  mul* 
tiplication  of  facts  and  inquiries,  awakening  such 
eagerness  of  effort  to  go  farther  still,  as  to  involve  all 
of  us  who  are  earnestly  devoted  to  the  pursuit  of 
knowledge  in  great  peril  of  becoming  one-sided  in 


82  Jesus  of  Nazareth 

our  development,  and  correspondingly  ill- qualified 
to  judge  concerning  the  offered  results  of  investiga- 
tion in  departments  quite  unlike  our  own.  I  am 
often  grieved,  aud  sometimes  angry,  to  see  theolo- 
gians and  preachers  undertaking  to  pass  judgment 
upon  any  and  every  question  in  the  exact  sciences, 
and  appearing  to  think  that  their  views  on  these 
subjects  carry  the  authority  which  attaches  to  the 
religious  and  moral  lessons  they  draw  from  revela- 
tion. Shall  I  then  think  it  wise  for  men  who  have 
given  their  whole  lives  to  matters  of  physical 
observation  and  mathematics,  and  in  those  direc- 
tions have  gained  deserved  reputation,  to  take  it  for 
granted  that  they  are  equally  qualified  to  pass 
judgment  off-hand  upon  questions  of  general  phi- 
losophy, or  upon  the  validity  of  historical  testi- 
mony %  Yet  not  more  ready  are  some  preachers  to 
settle  authoritatively  in  a  single  sermon  the  most 
difficult  questions  as  to  evolution,  than  are  some 
sensation  preachers  of  physical  science  to  settle  in  a 
fugitive  essay  the  largest  questions  of  religious  his- 
tory and  belief,  really  seeming  to  imagine  that  their 
views  of  any  and  all  subjects  are  entitled  to  as  much 
respect  as  men  justly  pay  to  the  results  of  their 
life-long  devotion  in  their  own  lines  of  investigation. 
In  this  respect  we  are  all  in  danger  of  error.  And 
what  shall  be  the  remedy  for  this  tendency  to  grow- 
ing narrowness  of  view  and  one-sidedness  of  judg- 
ment ?  Just  in  proportion  as  knowledge  is  becom- 
ing more  specialized  it  seems  increasingly  im- 
portant that  a  man's  early  training,  what  we  call  in 
the  technical  sense  his  education,  should  not  be  ex- 
clusively special,  but  so  far  as  possible  general  and 


His  Supernatural  Works,  83 

symmetrical.  And  then  as  we  push  out  into  our  sev« 
erai  lines  of  busy  investigation,  we  should  try  through 
life  to  keep  in  sight  and  in  hail  of  all  our  fellow  inves- 
tigators on  whatsoever  other  lines  across  the  broad 
and  busy  fields  of  inquiry.  Mr.  Darwin,  to  whom 
we  are  all  so  much  indebted,  stated,  toward  the  close 
of  his  life,  that  he  had  lost  all  relish  fo?  poetry. 
Was  not  that  a  pity  and  really  a  blunder  ?  I 
remember  a  few  years  since  to  have  asked  in  a 
circle  of  some  twenty  cultivated  gentlemen,  that 
each  would  tell  who  was  his  favorite  poet.  Even  a 
dear  lover  of  poetry  might  be  at  a  loss  to  make 
instant  reply,  but  it  was  amusing  to  see  how  some 
eminent  judges  and  other  lawyers,  some  highly- 
intelligent  and  well-read  bankers  and  merchants, 
would  take  on  a  far-away  look  at  the  very  idea  of 
having  any  favorite  poet  at  all.  Now  ought  not  all 
of  us  in  our  several  specialties  of  investigation  or  of 
practical  activity  to  keep  at  least  in  general  sym- 
pathy with  all  the  other  great  departments  of  knowl- 
edge and  reflection  and  living  interest  ?  Even  if 
this  should  restrict  somewhat  a  man's  acquaintance 
with  the  actual  and  possible  knowledge  pertaining 
to  his  specialty,  would  it  not  more  than  compensate 
by  giving  a  sounder  judgment  and  a  healthier 
mental  action,  even  in  regard  to  his  own  proper 
pursuits  ? 

When  we  turn  to  examine  the  evidence  that 
Jesus  wrought  supernatural  works,  we  find  one  of 
these  standing  out  in  singular  prominence,  namely 
his  own  resurrection.  He  is  recorded  as  having  re- 
peatedly predicted  to  his  disciples  that  he  would  be 
killed  and  would  rise  again  after  three  days.     Let 


84  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

us  attentively  consider,  so  far  as  can  be  done  in  a 
short  time,  the  evidence  that  this  predicted  resurrec- 
tion actually  occurred.  1  trust  you  will  bear  me 
witness  that  throughout  these  lectures  I  have  tried 
to  avofd  extravagance  of  language  and  vehemence 
of  assertion,  have  tried  to  speak  soberly,  in  words 
duly  weighed.  It  is  to  my  mind  only  an  apparent 
departure  from  this  course  to  make  the  following 
statement :  If  I  do  not  know  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
rose  from  the  dead,  then  I  know  nothing  in  the  his- 
tory of  mankind.  If  the  evidence,  when  fully  ex- 
amined with  a  calm  willingness  to  be  convinced, 
does  not  in  this  case  warrant  a  practical  certainty, 
then  there  is  no  adequate  evidence  of  any  historical 
event.  Let  us  rapidly  look  at  the  principal  testi- 
monies, remembering  that  such  a  view  must  nec- 
essarily be  quite  incomplete. 

No  person  whatever,  so  far  as  I  know,  now 
questions  that  the  Apostle  Paul  wrote  the  Epistles 
to  the  Corinthians,  the  Galatians  and  the  Romans. 
There  is,  in  fact,  equally  good  reason  to  believe 
that  he  wrote  other  Epistles,  but  let  that  pass  for 
the  present.  In  the  latter  part  of  Paul's  life  we 
reach  firm  ground  as  to  the  dates,  because  Roman 
history  tells  when  Festus  succeeded  Felix  as  proc- 
urator of  Palestine.  We  thus  determine  that 
First  Corinthians  was  written  A.  D.  57.  Now  the 
death  of  Christ  cannot  have  been  earlier  than  A. 
D.  30.  So  the  time  which  had  elapsed  when  Paul 
wrote  this  Epistle  was  at  most  27  years,  just  the 
tim3  from  the  battle  of  Gettysburg  to  the  present 
day.  Take  any  intelligent  man  among  us,  who  has 
reached  middle  age,  and  consider  how  near  to  him 


His  Supernatural  Works,  85 

seem  the  events  of  that  great  war,  how  clear  and 
sure  is  his  recollection  of  them.  Well,  in  the  fif- 
teenth chapter  of  First  Corinthians,  that  wonderful 
passage  which  has  invested  so  many  Christian 
funerals  with  immortal  hope  and  unspeakable  conso- 
lation, Paul  declares  that  Christ  was  raised  on  the 
third  day,  that  he  appeared  to  Cephas  and  James, 
twice  to  the  Twelve,  and  once  to  above  five  hun- 
dred brethren  at  once,  the  greater  part  of  whom  he 
declares  to  be  still  living.  Nothing  could  be  more 
explicitly  asserted.  And  it  would  have  been  folly 
to  make  the  assertion,  in  the  face  of  so  many  skep- 
tical and  inquisitive  Greeks,  and  so  many  hostile 
Jews  in  constant  connection  with  Palestine,  and  the 
height  of  folly  to  build  upon  this  asserted  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ,  his  entire  argument  for  a  Christian 
doctrine  which  some  of  the  Church  at  Corinth  were 
explicitly  denying,  if  there  had  been  the  least 
doubt  that  these  numerous  surviving  witnesses  ex- 
isted and  could  be  found.  Paul  risks  his  own  ve- 
racity and  all  his  influence  as  an  Apostle,  risks  the 
entire  truth  of  Christianity,  upon  the  one  point. 
"  If  Christ  hath  not  been  raised,  then  is  our  preach- 
ing vain,  your  faith  also  is  vain."  He  builds 
everything  upon  this  great  fact.  Several  times  in 
Second  Corinthians  also  he  speaks  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  as  raised  from  the  dead ;  also  in  Galatians, 
and  again  and  again  in  the  great  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  written  a  few  months  after  those  to  the 
Corinthians.  Here  he  again  makes  the  fact  of 
Christ's  resurrection  the  starting  point  for  proofs 
concerning  him  and  his  mission  and  work,  and  he 
declares  that  to  believe  that  God  raised  Jesus  from 


#5  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

the  dead  is  the  faith  of  the  gospel,  carrying  every* 
thing  with  it.  In  his  earlier  epistles  to  the  Thes- 
salonians,  written  as  much  as  five  years  before  Cor- 
inthians, he  not  only  speaks  of  Jesus  as  raised  from 
the  dead,  but  argues  from  that  fact.  "  If  we  be- 
lieve that  Jesus  died  and  rose  again,  even  so  them 
also  that  are  fallen  asleep  in  Jesus  will  God  bring 
with  him."  The  same  fact  is  also  asserted  in  his 
later  epistles,  as  Colossians,  Ephesians,  Timothy. 
And  besides  formal  assertions,  he  often  speaks  of  it 
as  a  matter  of  course,  recognized  by  all. 

Now  Paul  the  Apostle  was  assuredly  no  ordinary 
man.  It  does  not  require  life -long  study  such  as  I 
have  given  to  his  history  and  writings  to  perceive 
that  he  was  a  man  of  powerful  intellect,  immense 
force  of  character,  unimpeachable  sincerity,  and — a 
matter  which  will  grow  upon  one  when  his  attention 
has  been  turned  to  it — a  man  of  singular  common 
sense.  We  know  that  he  was  at  first  utterly  op- 
posed to  the  faith  of  the  Christians,  denying,  de- 
spising, persecuting  with  all  the  passionate  ardor  of 
his  soul,  and  sincerely  believing  that  in  all  this  he 
was  doing  his  duty.  He  had  been  the  foremost 
student  in  the  leading  College  at  Jerusalem  ;  the 
highest  prizes  of  attainment,  distinction  and  power 
that  pertained  to  his  country  and  his  calling  were 
easily  within  the  reach  ot  his  ardent  and  ambitious 
soul.  When  he  turned  from  all  this  to  join  the  few 
thousands  of  the  sect  which  he  had  persecuted  and 
seemed  likely  to  crush,  and  which  had  nothing 
worldly  to  offer,  it  was  assuredly  a  notable  event, 
one  which  has  profoundly  impressed  itself  upon 
thoughtful  minds   through   all  the    ages.     Let    me 


His  Supernatural  Works.  87 

tell  an  old  story.  In  the  middle  of  the  last  century 
an  Englishman,  Lord  Lyttelton,  and  his  friend  Gil- 
bert West,  a  brother  of  the  great  painter,  concerted 
together,  being  unbelievers  in  the  Bible  as  a  reve- 
lation, that  each  should  select  some  Bible  topic  and 
after  thorough  study  prepare  a  small  treatise  upon 
it,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  the  absurdity  of  the 
Christian  claims.  West  chose  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ,  and  Lyttelton  the  Conversion  of  Paul. 
When  they  met  some  time  afterwards  each  ex- 
pected to  surprise  and  grieve  the  other  by  confess- 
ing that  his  researches  had  led  him  to  believe  in 
Christianity  and  the  Bible,  and  each  published  a  short 
treatise  on  the  subject  to  that  effect.  West's  has 
been  superseded  by  more  vigorous  discussions. 
But  Lord  Lyttelton's  little  work,  "  Observations  on 
the  Conversion  of  St.  Paul,"  is  still  current.  Gruff 
old  Dr.  Johnson  called  it  "  a  treatise  to  which  in- 
fidelity has  never  been  able  to  fabricate  a  specious 
answer."  Lyttelton  has  most  impressively  argued 
that  Paul's  conversion  cannot  be  explained  as  due 
to  imposture  or  fanaticism  j  and  his  conversion  oc 
curred  only  a  few  years  after  Christ's  departure. 
This  highly  intelligent  and  strongly  prejudiced  man 
had  every  opportunity  of  knowing  the  facts,  and 
every  inducement  to  examine  them  with  care,  and 
he  became  fully  convinced  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
had  risen  from  the  dead,  and  in  that  conviction 
lived  and  labored,  suffered  and  died.  Keim,  in  his 
u  Jesus  of  Nazara,"  a  work  of  great  compass  and  of 
unsurpassed  learning  and  ability,  is  sufficiently 
skeptical  and  destructive  as  a  critic,  for  he  rejects 
the  fourth  gospel,  and  cuts  away  from  the   others 


&(  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

whatever  he  pleases ;  yet  Keim  declares,  "  Paul's 
help  supplies  the  whole  question  with  its  fixed 
point,  its  Archimedean  fulcrum ;  and  the  universal 
conviction  of  earliest  Christendom  acquires  the  his- 
torical basis  which  gives  it  certainty  and  clothes  it 
with  flesh  and  blood.  This  universal  conviction 
was  of  itself  able  to  stand  against  a  doubt  of  its 
truth  j  but  in  the  face  of  the  testimony  of  Paul,  the 
force  of  such  a  doubt  is  doubly  lost."  Keim  held 
that  historical  science  is  bound  within  the  limits  of 
"  material  perception  and  the  natural  order  of  the 
world."  With  this  definition  he  of  course  thought 
that  there  can  be  no  scientific  proof  of  Christ's 
resurrection.  But  he  insists  that  Christian  faith  in 
that  resurrection  "  is  not  only  beyond  the  reach  of 
refutation,  since  science  is  compelled  to  leave  the 
mystery  of  the  final  events  of  Jesus'  career  unsolved 
without  weakening  the  foundations  of  faith  by  a 
single  comment j  but  it  completes  and  illumines 
what  to  science  remained  an  obscure  point  and  a 
vexatious  limitation  of  its  knowledge."  And  where 
is  the  propriety  of  thus  limiting  historical  science 
to  the  range  of  material  perception,  and  the  sphere 
of  natural  order  ?  If  any  supernatural  events  have 
really  occurred,  they  are  a  part  of  the  facts  of  his- 
tory, and  can  not  be  omitted  from  the  view  of  a 
just  historical  science.  As  well  justify  the  Ptole- 
maic astronomy,  which  held  that  the  heavens  re- 
volve round  the  earth,  and  being  unable  to  account 
for  the  changing  position  of  certain  bright  stars, 
simply  called  them  "wanderers,"  planets.  Thus 
likewise  some  produce  very  symmetrical  systems  of 
theology,  by  omitting  inconvenient   facts  of  revela- 


His  Supernatural  Works.  89 

tion  or  of  consciousness.  In  excluding  the  super- 
natural from  history  by  his  very  definition,  Keim 
makes,  I  think,  an  arbitrary  assumption.  But  all 
the  more  remarkable  and  significant  is  the  practi- 
cal conclusion  he  so  strongly  announced  as  to  the 
fact  of  Christ's  resurrection. 

Now  remember  that  the  testimony  of  Paul's  con- 
temporary letters,  accompanied  by  his  remarkable 
conversion  and  his  noble  character  and  career, 
though  many  regard  it  as  in  itself  ample  evidence, 
by  no  means  stands  alone.  Peter  also  speaks  of 
the  Saviour's  resurrection  in  his  first  epistle,  speaks 
of  it  as  a  matter  of  course,  recognized  by  all  his 
readers,  just  as  Paul  had  often  done.  And  Peter 
repeatedly  makes  strong  statements  to  the  same 
effect  in  his  speeches  recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles.  This  book  of  Acts  was  forty  years  ago 
vehemently  assailed  by  Baur,  and  the  once  famous 
Tubingen  school  which  he  founded,  for  whom  it 
was  necessary  to  throw  the  book  overboard  because 
forsooth  it  conflicted  with  their  theory.  Baur  held 
that  the  conflict  between  Paul  and  certain  Jewish 
Christians,  who  insisted  that  all  Gentile  converts 
ought  to  be  circumcised  and  live  as  Jews,  and  who 
claimed  Peter  and  James  as  their  leaders  and  declared 
Paul  to  be  no  apostle,  was  really  a  conflict  between 
the  apostles  themselves;  that  Paul  and  his  followers 
on  the  one  hand,  and  Peter  and  James  with  their 
followers  on  the  other  hand,  were  bitterly  hostile. 
Baur  thought  he  could  find  proof  of  this  in  the  second 
chapter  of  Galatians  especially,  and  also  to  some 
extent  in  Romans  and  in  First  and  Second  Corin- 
thians.    He   could  not  discern  any  semblance  of 


90  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

such  proof  in  the  other  epistles  of  Paul,  and  it  was 
for  this  reason,  and  so  far  as  I  can  see  for  this  rea- 
son alone,  that  he  declared  Corinthians,  Galatians 
and  Romans  tc  be  the  only  genuine  epistles  of  Paul. 
This  statement  or  expression  was  taken  up  by 
second-hand  organs  of  skeptical  opinion,  and  has 
continued  fashionable  to  the  present  time.  We  are 
perfectly  at  liberty  to  show  that  these  four  epistles 
which  all  acknowledge  to  be  genuine  contain  am- 
ple proof  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  also  con- 
tain all  the  leading  facts  as  to  his  person  and  work, 
and  the  leading  doctrines  of  the  Christian  system. 
But  there  is  positively  no  reason,  apart  from  Baur's 
theory,  for  refusing  to  recognize  Thessalonians  and 
Philippians,  which  so  closely  resemble  the  four 
above-mentioned.  Nor  is  there  any  good  reason  for 
rejecting  .Colossians  and  Ephesians,  or  Titus  and 
Timothy.  For,  while  these  differ  from  the  earlier 
groups  in  their  leading  topics,  they  are  simply  the 
topics  suggested  by  the  rise  of  new  errors  to  be  com- 
bated. And  while  the  style  of  these  later  groups  of 
epistles  is  unlike  that  of  the  earlier,  it  is  only  such  a 
change  of  style  as  will  always  be  observable  in  a  first- 
rate  writer  when  his  subjects  change — a  fact  which 
Bishop  Westcott  once  happily  expressed  in  a  pri- 
vate letter  by  borrowing  a  phrase  from  the  higher 
mathematics  and  saying  that  u  style  is  a  function  of 
the  subject  as  well  as  of  the  author."  Holding  then 
that  Paul  was  really  at  enmity  with  Peter  and  James, 
as  supposed  to  be  shown  by  Galatians,  and  finding 
that  the  book  of  Acts  represents  these  apostles  as 
repeatedly  consulting  together  and  entirely  har- 
monious, Baur  coolly  declared  that  the  book  of  Acts 


His  Supernatural  Works.  91 

was  spurious;  that  it  was  written  at  a  later  period 
when  the  Paul  party  had  triumphed,  for  the  purpose 
of  concealing  the  original  conflict.  But  all  this  Tu- 
bingen theory,  which  once  attracted  immense  atten- 
tion and  threatened  to  darken  the  whole  heavens, 
has  blown  away,  leaving  scarce  a  rack  behind. 
Bishop  Lightibot,  Dr.  Fisher  of  Yale  and  others,  as 
well  as  many  in  Germany,  conclusively  showed  that 
the  second  chapter  of  Galatians  not  only  fails  to 
confirm  the  theory,  but  actually  disproves  it.  There 
is  to-day  no  historical  ground  to  maintain  that  Paul 
was  arrayed  against  the  other  apostles ;  no  reason  to 
question  the  account  given  in  the  book  of  Acts, 
that  while  some  Judaizers  claiming  Peter  and 
James  as  their  leaders,  were  hostile  to  Paul,  there 
was  no  hostility  nor  disagreement  between  the 
apostles  themselves.  And  if  any  still  assert  the 
contrary,  they  belong  to  that  class  of  English  and 
American  writers  who  set  forth  as  surprising  novel- 
ties, or  as  the  best  results  of  recent  inquiry,  German 
theories  long  ago  dead  and  buried  in  their  native 
land.  Whether  some  popular  and  very  noisy  theo- 
ries now  prevalent  as  to  the  Old  Testament  will  in 
like  manner  pass  away,  is  not  for  me  to  predict. 
But  we  hear  scarcely  anything  now  against  the 
authenticity  of  the  book  of  Acts,  much  of  it  so  evi- 
dently the  work  of  an  eye-witness,  and  all  giving 
proof  of  careful  research  and  remarkable  accuracy. 
Its  accuracy  at  various  points  has  been  curiously 
confirmed  by  recent  excavations  in  Cyprus  and 
Ephesus,  and  by  researches  concerning  the  account 
of  Paul's  voyage  and  shipwreck.  Renan,  who  is 
surely  skeptical  enough  for  ordinary  demands,  has 


92  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

stated  that  there  is  little  or  no  reason  to  question 
that  the  third  gospel  and  the  book  of  Acts,  which  are 
evidently  from  the  same  hand,  are  the  works  of 
Luke,  a  companion  of  the  Apostle  Paul. 

Now  this  book  of  Acts,  as  already  said,  abounds  in 
passing  references  as  well  as  express  assertions  con- 
cerning the  resurrection  of  Christ.  And  Part  I.  of 
the  same  work  on  the  Beginnings  of  Christianity, 
or  what  we  call  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  gives 
details  of  that  wonderful  event,  and  touchingly 
narrates  appearances  of  the  risen  Lord  to  some  of 
his  followers. 

This  reminds  us  that  each  of  the  four  gospels  not 
only  states  but  describes  with  more  or  less  detail, 
the  Saviour's  resurrection,  and  some  of  his  subse- 
quent appearances.  It  is  a  strange  thing  to  find 
some  objectors  still  repeating  that  these  four  ac- 
counts are  contradictory  in  their  details,  and  there- 
fore not  trustworthy.  One  charitably  supposes 
that  they  must  be  merely  repeating  without  person- 
al investigation  what  used  to  be  said  when  the  so- 
called  "  discrepancies "  of  the  gospels  were  the 
stock  in  trade  of  certain  critical  assailants.  Over 
and  over  again  it  has  been  shown,  and  I  think  con- 
clusively shown,  that  here  «.nd  elsewhere  the  differ- 
ence in  details  of  the  parallel  narratives  in  the  gos- 
pels must  really  strengthen  their  credibility.  Per- 
sons who  have  often  attended  upon  trials  in  court, 
to  say  nothing  of  these  who  have  studied  legal 
treatises  on  evidence,  are  well  aware  that  when 
several  witnesses  in  narrating  a  series  of  events 
agree  as  to  the  main  facts,  their  united  testimony 
is    only  strengthened  and  confirmed  by    disagree- 


His  Supernatural  Works.  93 

merit  in  minor  details,  even  if  occasionally  we  do  not 
quite  see  how  some  slight  point  of  disagreement  is  to 
be  explained.  If  they  coincided  in  every  minute 
particular,  we  should  know  the  witnesses  had  puttheir 
heads  together,  and  should  not  believe  them  at  all. 
The  application  of  this  to  the  gospels  has  for  a 
good  many  years  been  so  well  recognized  by  most 
of  those  who  really  examine  the  matter,  that  we 
find  the  allegation  of  contradiction  in  the  gospel 
narratives  now  rarely  made  except  by  second- 
hand writers,  who  borrow  from  older  works.  I 
have  sometimes  half  imagined  that  the  change  in 
Germany  of  late  years  is  partly  due  to  the  intro- 
duction, after  1848,  of  trial  by  jury.  I  wonder 
whether  those  magnificent  devotees  to  study  who 
lead  the  world  in  scholarly  attainment,  have  per- 
haps mixed  enough  with  the  active  world,  or  looked 
in  enough  upon  the  courts  of  justice,  to  get  some 
inkling  of  the  laws  of  evidence  in  respect  to  this 
matter.  However  that  may  be,  the  change  is 
doubtless  mainly  due  to  the  usual  oscillations  of 
speculation  and  inquiry.  Instead  of  now  roubling 
themselves  with  points  of  disagreement  in  th  gospels, 
many  German  critics,  and  some  mother  countries,  are 
greatly  exercised  to  account  for  the  agreement.  Va- 
rious theories  have  been  proposed  to  explain  the 
fact  that  considerable  portions  of  Matthew,  Mark 
and  Luke  contain  not  only  the  same  substantial 
matter,  but  often  quite  similar  phraseology.  Thus 
some  hold  that  Matthew  and  Luke  drew  from  Mark; 
others  that  Mark  and  Luke  drew  from  Matthew;  yet 
others  that  all  three  drew  from  some  pre-existing 
document  or  documents  which  soon  perished,     A 


94  Jesus  of  Xazarcth. 

view  which  I  should  prefer,  if  compelled  to  choose, 
is  that  the  apostles  in  their  oral  teaching 
gradually  fell  into  a  certain  cycle  of  selected  say- 
ings and  actions  of  their  Master;  and  that  we  can 
thus  account  for  the  agreement  at  many  points. 
Many  of  us,  however,  have  really  no  theory  to  offer 
as  to  the  agreement  of  the  three  gospels,  and  are 
patiently  waiting  to  see  if  any  valuable  results  will 
come  from  the  tossing  to  and  fro  of  ingenious  spec- 
ulations and  elaborate  inquiries. 

But  what  proof  have  we  that  the  gospels  are 
of  apostolic  origin!  For  any  thorough  examination 
of  this  question,  most  persons  have  to  rely  on  those 
who  make  it  a  specialty.  We  need  not  be  surprised 
at  such  a  necessity.  We  have  to  rely  on  lawyers 
as  to  the  titles  to  our  property,  on  physicians  to 
determine  our  diseases  and  prescribe  remedies,  and 
on  druggists  to  prepare  the  medicine.  Any  one 
of  these  may  err  and  ruin  us,  but  we  have  to  make 
the  best  selection  in  our  power,  and  take  the  conse- 
quences. Why  wonder  that  a  similar  situation  ex- 
ists as  to  determining  the  external  proof  for  the 
canon  of  Scripture?  As  regards  the  internal  evi- 
dences, every  thoughtful  reader  can  largely  judge 
for  himself.  And  if  only  men  would  thoughtfully  read 
the  gospels,  coming  near  in  historical  imagination  to 
the  person  they  exhibit,  and  listening  with  simple 
candor  to  his  words  of  wisdom  and  love,  many  who 
are  skeptical  now  would  feel  all  that  is  best  in  them 
drawn  toward  him  in  living  sympathy  and  devotion. 
The  Scriptures  in  general,  and  the  four  gospels  in 
particular,  carry  credentials  of  their  own  on  every 
page. 


His  Supernatural  Works.  95 

In  respect  then  to  the  external  evidence,  I  shall 
say  but  little.  Yet  it  may  be  mentioned  that  inter- 
esting progress  has  been  made  within  a  few  years. 
The  Tubingen  school  used  to  maintain  that  the 
fourth  gospel  was  not  written  till  after  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  Their  really  able  and  learned 
efforts  to  maintain  this  theory  have  led  to  thorough- 
going investigation,  and  the  date  of  this  gospel's 
historically  ascertained  existence  has  been  pushed 
back  farther  and  farther,  until  one  of  the  representa- 
tives of  the  school  admitted  that  it  existed  as  early 
as  A.  D.  120,  which  is  only  some  twenty-five  years 
later  than  the  ordinarily  assigned  date  of  its  composi- 
tion. The  late  Professor  Ezra  Abbot  of  Harvard, 
probably  the  foremost  American  scholar  in  this  par- 
ticular department,  undertook  some  years  ago  to 
investigate  the  origin  of  the  fourth  gospel,  with  a 
pre-disposition  (as  he  afterward  avowed)  to  regard 
it  as  decidedly  post-apostolic.  Going  into  the  mat- 
ter with  his  usual  thoroughness  and  patience,  he 
reached  the  opposite  conclusion,  and  published  an 
elaborate  essay  to  prove  that  the  fourth  gospel  was 
written  by  the  Apostle  John.  This  work,  along 
with  various  discussions  in  Germany  and  England, 
must  in  my  judgment  be  regarded  as  practically 
settling  that  question.  The  Tubingen  school  has 
broken  down  here  as  completely  as  with  reference 
to  the  book  of  Acts;  and  as  often  occurs  in  every 
department  of  human  inquiry,  patient  examination 
has  at  length  overtaken  and  overcome  the  most  fleet 
footed  and  shrill-voiced  hypothesis. 

We  have  long  known  from   ample  historical  evi 
dence    that  our   four  gospels   were    unhesitatingly 


96  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

received  in  every  section  of  the  Christian  world  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  second  century.  This  is  fully 
shown  by  the  statements  of  Irenseus,  Clement  of 
Alexandria  and  Tertullian,  by  the  use  of  the  four 
gospels  in  the  two  Egyptian  versions,  in  the  Old 
Latin  version  or  versions,  and  in  the  Old  Syriac 
version,  which  was  discovered  some  thirty  years 
ago.  Quite  recently  we  have  regained  the  long-lost 
Diatessaron  of  Tatian,  the  earliest  known  Harmony 
of  the  gospels,  prepared  soon  after  the  middle  of  the 
second  century;  and  it  makes  at  once  manifest  the 
fact  that  Tatian's  four  gospels  were  ours.  Import- 
ant light  has  also  been  thrown  upon  the  numerous 
citations  from  the  gospels  in  the  works  of  Justin 
Martyr,  now  believed  by  many  to  have  been  written 
earlier  than  A.  D.  150.  Justin's  quotations,  though 
evidently  the  same  in  substance  with  passages  in 
our  gospels,  differ  widely  in  the  expressions  em- 
ployed and  often  confound  or  mingle  similar  pass- 
ages ;  and  sometimes  he  adds  curious  statements  of 
things  said  or  done  which  must  have  been  traditional. 
Accordingly  some  objectors  have  earnestly  contend- 
ed that  his  gospels  must  have  been  different  from 
ours,  though  they  have  found  it  hard  to  account  for 
the  sudden  disappearance  of  every  vestige  of  these 
supposed  earlier  writings.  Now  it  has  long  been 
observed,  as  is  shown  in  Dr.  Gildersleeve's  excel- 
lent edition  of  Justin's  Apologies,  that  he  quotes  with 
great  looseness  from  the  Septuagint  also,  and  great- 
ly alters  the  phraseology  of  favorite  passages  in  Plato 
and  Xenophon  which  must  have  been  thoroughly  fa- 
miliar to  the  philosophic  emperors  he  addressed.  We 
see  that  his  memory  was  quite  inaccurate  as  to  de- 


His  Supernatural  Works,  91 

tails,  though  he  scarcely  ever  misrepresents  the  sub- 
stance. Even  in  our  day  of  convenient  printed 
editions  and  concordances,  inexact  quotation  of 
Scripture  is  quite  frequent.  But  still,  Justin's  addi- 
tional statements  drawn  from  tradition  were  not 
accounted  for.  Now  the  epoch-making  labors  of 
Westcott  and  Hort  concerning  the  Greek  text 
of  the  New  Testament  have  shown  that  Justin  habit- 
ually used  what  is  technically  called  the  "Western" 
type  of  text,  which  was  very  corrupt  and  had  va- 
rious additions  from  tradition,  and  was  widely  dif- 
fused before  the  middle  of  the  second  century  ;  and 
existing  documents  of  that  u  Western  n  text  present 
in  one  case  or  another  the  very  additions  which 
Justin  gives.  So  there  is  no  longer  any  parti- 
cle of  reason  to  think  that  he  had  different  gos- 
pels; he  simply  used  our  gospels  in  the  "  Western  " 
text.  If  one  is  startled  at- the  idea  that  a  very  cor- 
rupt text  of  the  gospels  was  used  in  many  quarters 
before  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  a  little 
reflection  will  show  in  this  fact  a  clear  and  strong 
proof  that  the  gospels  had  been  long  in  existence 
and  widely  received — an  argument  which  Teschen- 
dorf already  wrought  out  in  his  little  work  on  the 
u  Origin  of  the  Gospels.7' 

The  historical  existence  of  the  gospels  of  Mat- 
thew and  Mark  is  pushed  still  further  back  by  well- 
known  statements  of  Papias,  written  about  A.  D. 
130  to  140  ;  and  the  gospel  of  Matthew  is  quoted 
as  Scripture  in  the  so-called  Epistle  of  Barnabas, 
which  must  have  been  written  very  early  in  the 
century.  The  recently  discovered  and  already 
famous   little    treatise    entitled    "  Teaching   of  the 


98  Jesus  of  Namrcth. 

Apostles/'  upon  which  Professor  Rendel  Harris  and 
many  others  have  labored,  certainly  belongs  to  the 
second  century,  and  is  by  most  writers  referred  to 
the  beginning  of  the  century ;  and  it  contains 
numerous  quotations  from  Matthew  and  Luke. 
There  are  also  gospel  quotations  in  the  Epistles  of 
Ignatius,  and  in  the  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome, 
which  was  written  before  the  end  of  the  first  cen- 
tury, the  earliest  extant  Christian  writing  after  the 
New  Testament. 

On  the  historical  evidence  thus  briefly  stated  I 
may  remark  two  things.  We  find  references  to  the 
gospels  wherever  we  could  possibly  expect  to  find 
them,  considering  the  paucity  of  early  Christian 
literature,  and  the  character  and  design  of  the 
extant  writings.  The  other  remark  is,  that  the 
Christians  of  the  first  centuries  had  much  more 
copious  information  than  they  have  transmitted  to 
us,  and  however  uncritical  they  may  seem  to  us  in 
some  respects,  were  extremely  solicitous  about  the 
ascertainment  and  recognition  of  apostolic  writings. 

Now  let  us  return  to  the  resurrection  of  Jesus. 
Besides  the  great  and  varied  testimony  of  Paul, 
which  many  careful  enquirers  have  regarded  as  in 
itself  amply  sufficient,  besides  the  testimony  of 
Peter  in  his  epistles  and  the  numerous  and  implied 
statements  in  the  book  of  Acts,  we  have  the  four 
gospels,  giving  their  four  independent  narratives, 
with  multiplied  details,  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ. 
Even  if  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  be  supposed  to 
have  drawn  some  statements  from  a  pre-existing 
document,  or  from  a  common  cycle  of  oral  instruc- 
tion, they  separately  adopt  these  statements  and  thus 


His  Supernatural  Worhs.  99 

separately  endorse  them.  I  wish  there  was  time  to 
dwell  on  the  beautifully  diversified  and  yet  not 
really  conflicting  details  with  which  the  four 
gospels  describe  the  Lord's  resurrection  ;  and  on 
the  varied,  suggestive,  and  deeply  impressive  ap- 
pearances after  the  resurrection  which  one  or  another 
of  them  records.  I  should  like  to  present,  as  I  have 
tried  to  do  elsewhere  in  print,  some  obvious  con- 
siderations, which  go  to  account  for  his  appearing 
to  believers  only,  as  for  example  that  any  public 
appearance  would  have  stirred  the  Jewish  multi- 
tude into  fanatical  frenzy,  and  with  their  notions 
concerning  the  Messiah,  into  mad  revolution,  and 
would  likely  enough  have  aroused  the  Jewish 
rulers  into  some  scheme  of  putting  him  to  death 
again,  as  they  had  muttered  a  purpose  of  doing  with 
Lazarus. 

Those  who  are  determined  not  to  accept  the 
various  and  multiplied  evidence  of  the  Saviour's 
resurrection  must  of  course  suggest  some  explana- 
tion of  the  unquestionable  belief  in  it  among  the 
first  Christians.  Nobody  now  calls  the  story  an 
imposture  ;  all  that  passed  away  with  such  writers 
as  Tom  Paine.  Some  imagine  that  the  Saviour 
had  not  really  died.  But  remember  Pilate's  spe- 
cial inquiry  and  the  official  examination,  remem* 
ber  the  soldier's  spear,  upon  which  special  stress  is 
laid  by  the  apostolic  eye-witness  who  wrote  the 
fourth  gospel,  remember  the  Saviour's  personal 
veracity  in  predicting  that  he  would  die  and  in 
saying  afterwards  that  he  had  died  and  risen  again, 
remember  the  agreement  with  prophecies,  which 
were   not   understood   by  the  apostles  in  advance, 


100  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

but  became  clear  afterwards.     Some  say  that  cer- 
tain followers  of  Jesus  saw  mere  visions  of  him  and 
pursuaded  the  rest  that  these  were  real  appearances. 
Renan  actually  imagines  that  the  whole  belief  came 
from  Mary  Magdalene,  whom  he   calls  u  a  halluci- 
nated woman,"  and  who  led  the  apostles  and  above 
five  hundred  persons,   and  finally  all   Christians,  to 
believe  that  the  Saviour  had  appeared  to  her  alive. 
Yet  in  the  records  the  apostles  and  others  seem  to 
us  passing  sloiv  to  believe,  almost   rudely  repelling 
the  first  testimonies   of  the  women,   and  convinced 
only   when    Jesus    appeared   in  the  midst  of  their 
circle,  inviting  examination  of  his  person,  and  giv- 
ing irrefragable  proof  that  here  was  no  vision,  but 
a  body  with  flesh  and  bones,  and  bearing  the  marks 
of  crucifixion.     As   was   long    ago     said,     u  they 
doubted,  that  we  might  not  doubt."     And  if  others 
are  imagined  to  have  presently  shared  the   visions 
and  thought   them    actual   appearances,   why  were 
these  visions  so  few,  so  brief  and  orderly  and  sober, 
and  why  did  they  so  early  cease  ?     How  can  those 
who  have  given  us  the  character  and  teachings  of 
Jesus,  before  which  all  the  world  stands  in  admir- 
ation,   and    who  were    so  despairing   and   slow  of 
belief,  have  been  convinced  by  mere  dreams  1     The 
Apostle    Paul  says    he    had  several  visions,  giving 
him  divine  direction  and  encouragement  at  turning- 
points  of  his  ministry,  but  he  expressly  distinguishes 
from    these    the    appearance  which  occasioned  his 
conversion,  saying  that  it  occurred  at  midday,  while 
he  was  journeying,  and  that  Jesus  spoke  to  him  out 
of  heaven,  and  that  he  saw  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord. 
"  Oh,  but  it  was  all  so  long  ago.''     Yet  we  must 


His  Supernatural  'Wbtfcs,:  "*;'•  V'lQtl 

remember  that   their  testimony  was  recorded,  and 
was  confirmed  by  a  new   and   permanent    religious 
organization,  and  by  new  and  significant  symbols  of 
ceremony,  which  have  come  down  all  the   centuries 
parallel  with  the  records.      u  But  how  do   we  know 
that  the  supernatural  elements  of  the  gospels  were  not 
added  by  other  writers  in  the   generation  immedi- 
ately following  the   apostolic    age,    from    which  we 
have   so  little  historical  information  ?  "     I  answer, 
What  reason  is  there  for  thinking  that  they  were  so 
added  %     The  writings  have  unity,  of  character  and 
aim,  and  of  style  and  tone.       Nobody  would  dream 
of  cutting  out  large  portions  of  such  writings,    with- 
out the   slightest  external  ground,    except   persons 
who  were   determined  beforehand  to  reject   at   all 
hazards  whatever  savors  of  the  supernatural.      And 
what  is  this  but  simply  and  flagrantly   begging  the 
question  ?     There  is  a  homely   story  of   a   Scotch- 
man who  said,  u  I  am  open  to  conviction,   but   I'd 
like  to  see  the  mon  that  could  convince  me."     Now 
I  do  not  apply  this  to  every  one  who    questions,   or 
hesitates  to  accept,  the  reality  of  our  Lord's   resur- 
rection— by  no  means  ;  but  only  to  those  who  with- 
out the  slightest  external  warrant  or  internal  opening 
would  pluck  out   and  relegate  to  a  later   period  the 
supernatural  elements  of  the  gospels,  and  then  coolly 
say  that  the  genuine  records  of  Jesus  contain   noth- 
ing supernatural. 

It  has  not  been  possible  in  so  brief  a  compass  to 
give  any  adequate  statement  of  the  evidences  which 
to  my  mind  so  conclusively  show  that  the  Founder 
of  Christianity  did  actually  rise  from  the  dead,  as 
all  his  first  followers  believed,  including  those   who 


102  Jesus  of  Nazareth 

wrote  the  wonderful  books  we  call  the  New  Testa- 
ment, as  they  attested  by  all  manner  of  sacrifice  and 
heroism,  and  many  of  them  by  martyr  deaths.  The 
proofs  are  eminently  cumulative. in  their  character, 
and  in  many  cases  depend  greatly  on  appreciation 
of  the  details.  But  I  am  fully  persuaded  that  who- 
ever will  read  over  the  references  to  this  subject  in 
the  Acts  and  Epistles,  and  the  descriptions  given  in 
the  four  gospels,  and  will  consider  all  the  circum- 
stances, and  reflect  upon  the  power  which  a  belief 
in  the  Lord's  resurrection  gave  to  Christianity, 
whoever  will  examine  the  whole  matter  with  the 
evidence  that  is  open  to  us  all,  and  with  ordi- 
nary human  willingness  to  be  convinced,  must  be 
very  profoundly  impressed  by  the  multiplied  evi- 
dence ;  and  I  see  not  how  such  a  one  can  fail  to 
accept  that  sublime  fact  which  from  the  outset 
formed  the  central  pillar  of  the  Christian  evidences. 
When  once  this  great  supernatural  work  of  Jesus 
is  accepted,  there  is  little  need  to  argue  as  to  the 
intrinsic  probability  or  attendant  circumstances  of 
his  other  miracles.  If  he  rose  from  the  dead, 
according  to  his  own  prediction,  this  authenticates 
all  his  teachings  and  all  his  claims.  Then  indeed, 
as  Paul  wrote  to  the  Romans,  he  u  was  born  of  the 
seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh,  and  was  de- 
clared to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power  according 
to  the  spirit  of  holiness  by  resurrection  from  the 
dead."  For  this  resurrection  set  the  seal  of 
divine  approval  upon  all  that  he  claimed,  and  he 
claimed  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  If  he  rose  from 
the  dead,  then  his  teachings,  which  profess  to  be  a 
revelation  from  God,  are  to  be  so  received,  with  all 


His  Supernatural  Works.  103 

confidence  and  all  submission.  Revelation  itself, 
however  given,  is  necessarily  supernatural;  and 
other  supernatural  works  accompanying  a  revela- 
tion may  well  seem  to  us  altogether  in  place,  acting 
as  external  credentials  in  harmony  with  its  own  in- 
ternal claims  and  adaptations.  If  Jesus  Christ 
rose  from  the  dead,  then  his  immediate  followers,  to 
whom  he  promised  the  special  mission  of  the  di- 
vine Spirit,  to  bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance 
which  they  had  heard  from  him,  and  to  guide  them 
into  all  the  truth,  are  themselves  also  authoritative 
instructors  concerning  him  and  in  his  name.  If 
he  rose  from  the  dead,  then  we  need  have  no  difficul- 
ty in  accepting  whatever  is  clearly  and  surely  taught 
in  the  accompanying  revelation  concerning  his 
Incarnation,  his  Atonement,  and  the  work  of 
Regeneration  by  the  Spirit  whom  he  sent  as  his 
successor.  Then  also  Jesus  Christ  authenticates 
for  us  the  Old  Testament.  For  he  and  his 
apostles  have  repeatedly  declared  the  Scriptures  to 
be  from  Grod,  and  to  be  of  indestructible  authority. 
But  we  know  from  ample  Jewish  and  Christian 
evidence,  that  what  his  hearers  would  inevitably 
understand  by  the  term  Scriptures,  and  what  he 
therefore  must  have  meant,  would  be  exactly  the 
books  which  we  call  the  Old  Testament.  And  behold, 
what  new  views  we  gain  as  to  the  meaning  of  that 
wonderful  collection  of  ancient  and  varied  writings, 
the  Old  Testament,  when  it  is  seen  how  all  their 
teachings  converge  toward  him,  and  become  one 
great  History  of  Redemption. 

But  still,  I  can  imagine  some  one  saying,  it  is  so 
hard  to  bring  that  first  Christianity  near  to  our- 


104  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

selves.  It  shines  like  a  star,  but  it  seems  so  dis- 
tant. Christianity  has  indeed  been  by  many  sadly 
corrupted,  grievously  abused.  But  consider,  every 
gift  of  genius  is  abused  by  many,  every  form  of 
government  has  been  corrupted,  every  dearest  re- 
lation of  life  that  ought  to  make  us  blessed  may  be 
so  misused  as  to  render  us  miserable.  And  think 
how  much  good  Christianity  has  done,  and  how 
much  more  good  it  assuredly  would  do,  if  we  who 
call  ourselves  Christians  would  live  more  faithfully 
according  to  its  requirements  and  in  the  inspiration 
of  its  motives  and  hopes,  and  would  more  zealously 
carry  out  the  departing  Saviour's  commission,  and 
preach  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  unto  all 
nations. 

Let  us  remember  too  that  believing  in  Jesus 
Christ  and  his  religion  is  not  like  believing  in  some 
mathematical  formula,  or  some  metaphysical  conclu- 
sion, or  some  ascertainment  of  general  history.  If 
Christianity  be  true,  it  is  gloriously  true — yea, 
and  tremendously  true.  Remember  furthermore  ; 
Christianity  is  not  only  a  system  of  ethics,  or  a 
system  of  doctrines,  it  is  embodied  in  a  person. 
Egotism  is  often  ridiculous  j  but  take  one  step  up- 
ward, and  behold  it  is  a  sublime  egotism  when 
Jesus  Christ  says,  u  I  am  the  way,  and  the  truth, 
and  the  life.  No  one  cometh  unto  the  Father  but 
through  me."  Through  him,  then,  let  us  draw 
near,  ou  him  let  us  personally  rely.  It  may  be  that 
differences  of  doctrinal  conception  are  at  present 
unavoidable,  but  why  shall  we  not  all  trust  and 
lovingly  obey  the  personal  Saviour  ?  Nor  must  we 
forget  that  to  hold  aloof  from   Christianity  is  not 


His  Supernatural  Works.  105 

simply  rejecting  some  creed,  or  system  of  opinion, 
it  is  rejecting  Jesus  Christ  himself,  the  Son  of  God, 
the  Saviour  of  men.  Cannot  each  one  of  us  say  at 
least  so  much  as  this,  u  Lord,  I  believe,  help  thou 
mine  unbelief? "  Behold,  he  who  one  day  said 
that  to  Jesus  was  heard  and  blessed. 


DR.  BROADUS'S  WORK  ON  PREACHING. 


ON  THE  PREPARATION  AND  DELIVERY  OF  SERMONS. 


LL.D.       Crown    8vo.       514    pages. 


By   John    A.  Broadus,   D.D., 
Cloth,$i.75.      16th  Edition. 

4Gg-  No  other  work  on  the  same  subject,  published  in  this  country,  has  sold  so 
largely  in  so  short  a  time,  while  the  religious  and  secular  press,  in  all  parts  of  the 
country,  has  almost  universally  comtnended  it  in  strong  and  earnest  no'ices. 

Its  immediate  republication  in  London,  with  an  Introduction  by  Rev.  Joseph 
Angus,  D.D.,  was  followed  by  the  indorsement  of  Bishop  Ellicott,  Rev.  C.  H.  Spurgeon, 
and  the  religious  periodicals,  demonstrating  that  it  met  with  equalfavor  abroad. 

The  work  not  only  meets  the  wants  of  students  and  young  ministers,  but  is  very 
suggestive  and  stimulating  to  those  of  maturer  age.  It  is  warmly  commended  to 
Sunday-school  teachers,  lay  preachers  and,  public  speakers  in  general.  It  takes 
unusual  pains  to  give  suggestions  for  the  preparation  and  conduct  of  what  is  called 
extemporaneous  discourse,  while  doing  full  justice  to  all  the  methods. 


NOTICES   OF  THE   WORK. 


"  Prepared  by  a  very  able  teacher.  He 
has  had  a  practical  knowledge  of  his  sub- 
ject, is  intimately  acquainted  with  the  lit- 
erature of  all  parts  of  it,  and  has  treated 
the  whole  with  devoutness,  thoroughness, 
blended  scholarship,  and  good  sense." — 
Dr.  Angus,  in  Preface  to  London  edition. 

"  The  preacher  who  desires  to  have  an 
intelligent  appreciation  of  the  demands  of 
his  work,  and  of  the  way  in  which  he  may 
attain  excellency  in  it,  cannot  do  better 
than  study  this  thoughtful  and  suggestive 
treatise." — English  Independent. 

"A  book  on  preaching,  by  a  master  of 
the  art  Everywhere  in  his  book  there  is 
that  intensity  of  earnestness  which  is  at 
once  the  charm  and  characteristic  of  his 
oreaching." — Religious  Herald. 

"A  judicious  and  exhaustive  treatise — 
destined,  we  think,  to  occupy  a  very  promi- 
nent, if  not  the  highest  place  among 
books  on  Homiletics." — Methodist  Home 
Journal. 

"Abounds  in  excellent  hints,  rules,  and 
suggestions.  It  is  very  lucid  in  style — 
must  do  good  on  a  large  scale.'"— Southern 
Presbyteria  n . 

"  It  bears  the  marks  of  close  study,  of 
careful  deliberation,  h  always  suggestive, 
breathes  a  good  pure  spirit,  and  has  a  style 
that  is  always  clear  and  attractive." — 
Lutheran  and  Missionary. 


"A  rich  mine  of  the  best  thoughts  on  the 
grandest  subject."  —  Raleigh  Episcopal 
Methodist. 

"  Elaborate  in  plan  and  execution,  syste- 
matically arranged — we  commend  the  vol- 
ume as  one  of  the  best  of  its  kind." — The 
Adva?ice. 

"The  most  complete  and  comprehensive 
work  of  the  kind  published  in  this  country.." 
—  Christian  Intelligencer. 

"A  good  book  ;  full  of  instruction,  rich, 
varied,  and  exhausti\e."-PrincetonRevie'w. 

"I  know  of  no  one  book  from  which  a 
clergyman  can  learn  so  much  of  the  art  of 
preaching." — W.  Sparrow,  D.D.,  Prof,  in 
Prot.  Epis.  Theol.  Seminary  of  Va. 

"  Even  for  the  general  reader  it  has  un- 
usual attractions.  It  is  exceedingly  read- 
able and  charmingly  written."-  The  World. 

"Sabbath-school  superintendents  and 
teachers  will  be  guided,  helped,  and 
strengthened  by  it." — S.  School  Times. 

"It  abounds  in  suggestions  which  may 
be  turned  to  profitable  account,  not  only  by 
preachers,  but  by  lawyers,  and  all  others 
who  are  called  upon  to  address  public  au- 
diences."— American  Lit.  Gazette. 

"  We  have  read  the  book  with  absorbing 
interest.  Rich,  deep  thoughts  and  emi- 
nently practical  suggestions  abound 
through  these  pages." — Associate  Reformed 
Presbyterian. 


Copies  sent  by  mail  on  receipt  of  price. 


IMPORTANT  RELIGIOUS  WORKS. 
MR.  SPURGEON'S  NEW  BOOK: 

The  Cheque-Book  of  the  Bank  of  Faith. 

BEING  PRECIOUS  PROMISES  ARRANGED  FOR  DAILY  USE. 
With  Brief  Experimental  Comments.  Nearly  400  pages,  i2mo,  $1  50. 

**■  When  it  is  state  i  that  this  well-named  book  contains  a  Scripture  Prom- 
ise for  each  day  in  the  year,  commented  on,  in  his  best  v .in,  by  the  prince 
of  practical  and  experimental  preachers,  enough  has  been  said  to  commend  it 
as  first  in  its  class." — N.  Y.  Christian  Intelligencer. 

"  It  is  done  in  the  great  preacher's  inimitable  style,  and  speaks  home 
ON  EV2RY  page  to  the  heart  and  need  of  the  believer."— A7;  Y.  Independ't, 

"Mr  Spurgeon's  words  are  so  plain,  his  style  so  sparkling,  and  his 
spirit  so  devout,  that  the  reading  of  his  productions  is  almost  sure  to  excite 
a  mental  glow  and  awaken  holy  aspirations.  This  book  is  brimful  of 
quickening,  soothing,  soul-lifting  power.'''' — N.  Y.  Witness. 

"  As  there  are  three  hundred  and  sixty -five  cheques  in  this  book,  the  man 
who  makes  right  use  of  them  is  rich  indeed." — N.  Y.  Observer. 

Palestine  in  the  Time  of  Christ. 

By  Edmund  Stapfer,  D.  D.,  of  the  Protestant  Faculty,  Paris.  With  map, 

and  plans    Uniform   with    Stanley's  "  Sinai  and  Palestine."    Crown 

8vo,  cloth.  $2.50. 

"  There  is  so  much  here  of  accurate  learning,  and  of  matter  extremely 
valuable  in  respect  to  the  personal  and  every  day  life  of  the  people^  that  *  it 
fills  a  place  not  filled'  by  any  other  volume  within  our  knowledge.  It  is  an 
excellent  book  for  reference  for  all  who  would  like  to  interpret  biblical 
passages  for  homiletic  purposes  with  minute  and  accurate  statement. " — 
N.  Y.  Christian  Advocate  and  Journal. 

"  Dr.  Stapfer  may  be  congratulated  on  the  successful  way  in  which  he 
has  accomplished  his  task.  He  has  studied  the  diversified  topics  he  treats 
of,  and  has  generally  drawn  his  material  from  the  best  authorities,  arrang- 
ing it  in  lucid  order  Few  guides  will  be  found  more  useful  in  surveying 
the  varied  details  into  which  a  comprehensive  subject  leads  him.  There  is 
no  English  book  that  can  be  put  beside  it  as  occupying  the  same  ground." — 
London  Athenceum. 

"  De  Pressense's  Brilliant  Book." 

THE  ANCIENT  WORLD  AND  CHRISTIANITY.  By  E.  de  Pressense, 

D.  D.,  author  of  a  "  Study  of  Origins,"  etc.    Cr.  8vo,  500  pages,  $1.75. 

"  It  is  an  admirable  hand-book  of  comparative  religion.  It  is  a  sub- 
stantial, learned,  and  instructive  treatment  of  a  most  important  subject. " — 
British  Weekly. 

"  A  brilliant  book.  .  .  .  Ao  one  zvho  cpens  the  book  is  likely  to  fail 
to  admire  the  ingenuity  of  the  treatment  of  the  beliefs  of  the  primitive 
man."—  London  Literary  World. 

"Brilliant  in  style,  lucid  in  exposition,  comprehensive  in  philosophic 
grasp,  it  presents  a  fair  specimen  of  what  modern  scholarship  and  scientific 
thought  can  accomplish,  together  with  a  firm  belief  in  the  fundamental 
propositions  of  Christianity."— Boston  Advertiser. 

"  This  book  is  a  great  treasury  of  gathered  learning,  presented  in  a  pop. 
ular  form."— A".  Y.  Observer. 

Copies  sent  by  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  of  price. 
A.  C.  ARMSTRONG  &  SON,  714  Broadway,  New  York. 


STANDARD   RELIGIOUS   WORKS. 


Now  and  Enlarged  [4thJ  Edition,  in  Cheaper  Form, 

OF 

CHARLES  L.  BRACE'S  CESTA  CHRISTL 

A  HISTORY  OF  HUMANE  PROGRESS  UNDER  CHRIS- 
TIANITY.   With  New  Preface  and  Supplemen- 
tary Chapter     540  pp.,  cloth. 
Price  reduced  from  S2.J0  to  $/.jo. 

"  It  is  especially  adapted  to  assist  the  clergyman  and  religious  teacher  in  his  strug- 
gles with  honest,  thoughtful  infidelity." 

"  It  presents  a  storehouse  of facts  bearing  on  the  influences  of  Christianity  upon 
such  important  topics  as  the  paternal  power,  the  position  of  woman  under  custom  and 
law,  personal  purity,  and  marriage,  slavery,  cruel  and  licentious  sports,  and  all  matters 
of  humanity  and  compassion,  etc.  The  thoughtful  reader  will  here  gather  in- 
formation  A'HICH  COULD  ONLY  BE  OBTAINED  FROM  LIBRARIES  OR  MANY  VOLUMES." 

Rev.  D*-.  R.  S.  STORES  says:  "IT  IS  A  BOOK  THAT 
DESERVES  THE  VERY  WIDEST  CIRCULATION  FOR  ITS  CAREFUL- 
NESS AND  CANDOR,  ITS  AMPLE  LEARNING,  its  just,  discrimina- 
ting analysis  of  historical  movements  as  initiated  or  governed  by 
moral  forces,  and  for  the  fine  spirit  which  pervades  it." 

"The  skill  and  industry  with  which  Mr.  Brace  has  gleaned  and  sorted  the  vast  ac- 
cumulation of  material  here  gathered  together,  the  better  to  show  forth  the  power  and 
influence,  direct  and  indirect,  of  Christ's  teachings,  is  not  only  praise- worthy,  but  even 
in  a  certain  sense  wonderful.  He  has  a  complete  mastery  of  his  subject,  and  many 
chapters  in  the  book  are  of  exceeding  value  and  interest." — London  Morning  Post. 

A  NEW  and  REVISED  EDITION,  with  NEW  MAPS  and  ILLUSTRATIONS, 

STANLEY'S  SINAI"  AND  PALESTINE. 

In  Connection  with  their  History.     By  Dean  A.  P.  STANLEY. 

With  7  Elaborate  and   Beautifully   Colored 

Maps,  and  other  Illustrations. 

Large  Crown  8vo  Vol.,  Cloth,  640  pp.      Price  reduced  from  $4  to  $2.50. 

The  late  Dean  Stanley  published  a  new  and  revised  edition  of  his 
"  Sinai  and  Palestine."  In  it  he  made  considerable  additions  and  cor 
rections,  giving  the  work  the  final  impress  of  his  scholarship,  taste  and 
ability.  This  edition  has  been  carefully  conformed  to  the  last  English 
edition — including  the  new  maps  and  illustrations,  and  is  herewith  com- 
mended anew  AS  THE  MOST  READABLE  AS  WELL  AS  THE 
MOST  ACCURATE  WORK  ON  THE  SUBJECT  IN  THE  ENG- 
LISH LANGUAGE. 

Rev.  Dr.  H.  M.  Field,  Editor  of  "  N.  Y.  Evangelist,"'  says  of  Stanley's  "Sinai 
and  Palestine"  :  "  We  had  occasion  for  its  constant  use  in  crossing  the  desert,  and  in 
journeying  through  the  Holy  Land,  and  can  bear  witness  at  once  to  its  accuracy  and  to 
the  charm  of  its  descriptions.  Of  all  the  helps  we  had  it  was  by  far  the  most  cap- 
tivating." 

Copies  sent  by  mail  on  receipt  of  price. 

A.  C.  ARMSTRONG  &  SON,  714  Broadway,  New  York. 
« 


REV.  DR.  ALEXANDER  BRUGES  WORKS. 

THE  MIRACULOUS  ELEMENT  IN  THE  GOSPELS. 

By  Alexander  Balmain  Bruce,  D.D.,  Author  of   "The  Parabolic 

Teaching  of  Christ."     8vo,  cloth.    $2.50. 

This  work,  though  constructed  on  a  different  method,  may  be  regarded  as  a  corn- 
pan  on  to  my  work  on  The  Parabolic  Teaching  of  Christ,  published  a  few  years 
ago.  In  the  Fifth  and  Sixth  Lectures  I  have  considered  from  my  point  of  view,  at 
considerable  length,  a  large  number  of  the  miraculous  narratives,  and  made  observa- 
tions on  nearly  the  whole  of  the  narratives  of  this  character  contained  in  the  Gospels 
My  object  in  these  portions  of  the  work  is  not  to  expound  homiletically  the  whole 
narrative  in  which  a  miracle  is  recorded,  but  to  inquire  whether  the  event  recorded  be 
indeed  a  miracle. 

"  It  will  take  rank  ai  once  among  the  standard  treatises  upon  its  always  impor- 
tant and  engrossing  theme.  It  is  an  elaborate  sfudy — the  fruit  of  wide-reaching  and 
profound  research  and  patient  reflection.  The  result  of  these  studies  is  that  the 
volume  is  a  powerful  defense  of  the  miraclex  as  an  essential  feature  of  the  religion  of 
Christ.  It  is  a  cause  of  congratulation  to  the  whole  Christian  public  that  so  valuable 
sourse  of  lectures  has  been  given  to  the  whole  world  in  so  available  shape" — Boston 
Congregation  alist. 

"An  exhaustive  discussion  of  the  New  Testament  Miracles.  The  topics  are 
candidly,  lucidly,  and  very  ably  considered.  The  volume  is  a  rich  addition  to  our 
apologetic  literature,  which  every  Biblical  studct  will  desire  to  add  to  his  library."— 
■Zton's  Herald. 


The  Parabolic  Teaching  of  Christ. 

A  Systematic  and  Critical  Study  of  the  Parables  of  our  Lord.     By  Rev. 
Prof.  A.  B.  Bruce,  D.D.     i  vol.,  8vo,  cloth,  527  pp.  Price,  $2.50. 

"A  work  which  will  at  once  take  its  place  as  a  classic  on  the  Parables  of  our  Sa- 
viour.   No  minister  should  think  of  doing  witho  ut  it." — American  Presbyterian  Review. 

American  Literary  Churchman  says  :  "  We  recommend  this  book  with  the  most 
confident  earnestness.  It  is  a  book  to  be  bought  and  kept :  it  has  both  depth  and 
breadth  and  minute  accuracy  ;  it  has  a  living  sympathy  with  the  teaching  of  the  Para- 
bles and  wilh  the  spirit  of  the  Master." 

ENGLISH  NOTICES. 

"Prof.  Bruce  brings  to  his  task  the  learning  and  the  liberal  and  finely  sympathetic 
spirit  which  are  the  best  gifrs  of  an  expositor  of  Scripture.  His  treatment  of  his  subject 
is  vigorous  and  original,  and  he  avoids  the  capital  mistake  of  overlaying  his  exegesis 
with  a  mass  of  other  men's  views." — Spectator. 

*'  The  studies  of  the  Parables  are  thorough,  scholarly,  suggestive  and  practical. 
Fullness  of  discussion,  reverence  of  treatment,  and  sobriety  of  judgment,  mainly  char* 
acterize  this  work." — Christian  World. 

"Each  Parable  is  most  thoughtfully  worked  out,  and  much  new  light  is  thus  thrown 
on  the  difficulties  which  surround  many  of  these  beautiful  and  suggestive  examples  oi 
Divine  teaching." — C  ergymen's  Magazine. 

"This  volume  has  only  to  be  known  to  be  welcomed,  not  by  students  alone,  but  by 
all  earnest  students  ol  Christ's  oracles.  On  no  subject  has  Dr.  Bruce  spoken  more 
wisely  than  on  the  question  why  Jesus  spoke  m  parables.  The  one  end  the  author  sets 
before  himself  is,  to  find  out  what  our  Lord  really  meant.  And  this  he  does  with  a 
clearness  and  fullness  worthy  of  all  praise.      Familiar  as  we  are  with,  some  of 

the  best  and  most  popular  works  on  the  Parables,  we  do  not  know  any  to 
which  we  could  look  for  so  much  aid  in  our  ssarsh  aft.T  the  very  meaning 
which  Christ  would  nave  us  find  in  His  words."— Nonconformist. 


Copies  sent  by  mail,  postpaid,  on  receipt  a f  price, 
C.  ARMSTRONG  &  SON,  714  Broadway,  New  York. 


STANDARD   RELICIOUS   WORKS. 

IS  THERE  SALVATION  AFTER  DEATH; 

A  Treatise  on  the  Gospel  in  the  Intermediate  State. 

By  E.  D.  Morris,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  in  Lane  Theological  Sem- 
inary, Cincinnati.     Crown  8vo,  cloth,  $1.25.     2d  Edition. 

if.  Y.  Observer  says:  "The  various  views  are  stated  with  fairness  and  precision, 
the  specific  passages  of  Scripture,  bearing  upon  the  subject,  are  carefully  considered, 
as  weil  as  the  general  testimony  of  Scripture  in  relation  to  it.  We  commend  the 
volumt  to  ministers  and  teachers." 

N.  V.  Evangelist  :  "  Clear  in  method  and  cogent  in  argument,  it  is  saturated 
throughout  -with  the  large  literature  of  its  subject,  is  freefro?n  all  acerbity  and  un- 
fairness, and  is  loyal  to  God's  Word  as  tlte final  test  of  Christian  truth.  It  will  settle 
doubt  at.  d  confirm  faith" 

THE   HUMILIATION  OF  CHRIST 

in  its  Physical,  Ethical,  and  Official  Aspects. 

(Being  the  Sixth  of  the  Cunningham  Lectures.)  By  Rev.  A.  B.  Bruce 
D.D.  Octavo,  cloth,  gilt  top,  $2.50.  Uniform  with  the  same 
author's  "Parabolic  Teaching  of  Christ"  and  "Miraculous 
Element  in  the  Gospels. " 

"  These  lectures  are  well  worthy  of  the  name  they  bear,  and  of  their  precursors 
in  the  series  and  the  book  in  which  they  are  published,  with  ample  notes  and  refer- 
ences, will  be  valuable  to  t/teologians,  supplying  a  want  in  the  literature  of  the  subject, 
and  containing  many  fruitful  germs  of  theught.  Dr.  Bruce' s  style  is  uniformly 
e'ear  and  vigorous,  and  this  book  has  the  rare  advantage  of  being  at  once  stimulating 
and  satisfy  in  i  to  the  mind  in  a  high  degree.  He  has  given  us  a  book  that  wilt  really 
advance  the  theological  understanding  of  the  great  truth  that  forms  its  subject" — 
British  and  Foreign  Evangelical  Review. 

The  English  Churchman  says  :  "The  title  of  the  book  gives  but  a  faint  concep- 
tion of  the  value  and  wealth  of  its  contents Dr.  Bruce's  work  is  really  one 

of  exceptional  value  ;  and  no  one  can  read  it  without  perceptible  gain  in  theological 
knowledge,"  

BY  REV.  DR.  A.  B.  BRUCE. 

THE  TRAINING  OF  THE    TWELVE, 

Or,  PASSAGES  OUT  OF  THE  GOSPELS. 

Exhibiting  the  twelve  Disciples  of  Jesus  under  Discipline  for  the  Apostle- 
ship.  Uniform  with  same  Author's  " The  Humiliation  of  Christ" 
&c.     Octavo,  nearly  600  pages,  cloth,  gilt  top,  $2.50. 

"  A  really  great  book  on  an  important,  large,  and  attractive  subject — a  book  full  of 
loving,  wholesome,  profound  thoughts  about  the  fundamentals  of  Christian  faith. and 
practice." — British  and  Foreign  Evangelical  Review. 

"  Full  of  suggestion  and  savour.  It  should  be  the  companion  of  the  minister,  for  the 
theme  is  particularly  related  to  himself,  and  he  would  find  it  a  very  pleasant  and  profit- 
able companion." — Sturgeon's  Sivt-rd  and  Trowel. 

"■  A  more  wise,  scholarly,  and  more  helpful  work  has  not  been  published  for  many 
years  past." — Wesleyan  Magazine. 

Copies  sent  by  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  of  price,  by 

A.  C.  ARMSTRONG  &.  SON,  714  Broadway,  New  York. 

4 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


APR    14  1948 

,dEC 


i  use 
viAR  301957. 

REC'D  LD 

f"\  30  tea/ 


:W 


■ 


REC 


;  <3' 

JAN  9    ttBMc 


D  LD 

f>9'64-UAM 

5    1968  41 


REC'D  LC 

MAR  1  2  ibo 
RECTJCB   Ml 

p      ;§ 


WW '27' 


6A-6'* 


LD  21-100m-9,'47(A5702sl6)476 


9%* 


**** 


LOAN  DEPT. 

JAN  1  0 1972  * 


172-t  PM5J 


371496 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


